a a II I

\L.

EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS. REVOLUTIONARY IDEAS, AND THE PROMOTION OF SCIENCE—VOL, 6 No.4 1998 $5.95 USA ($7.95 CAN/INT1)

;rge<ii;

YE , c,Ey D ieE-YREALLY.REyDgp,

• Interview with Tack Homer: The World's Most Famous Dinosaur Digger • Anastasia and the Resurrection Myth • Michael Shermer on the Pope • Tavris and Bluming on Alternative Medicine • Graham Hancock's Lost Civilization • Thomas Disch on Madame Blavatsky PLUS: Richard Dawkins Sandbagged by Creationists • 8th 1st Annual Ig Noble Awards • Ray Hyman Responds to Uri Geller 6 Randi's $I,000,000 Dowsing Challenge • fr. SKEPTIC: Aliens; UFOs; Psychic Math

21

74 47 0 82385 t.

.. ... MORE VOICES OF JFK CONSPIRACY

THE JFK HEAD SHOT

I would like to dear up another JFK myth.

Mr. Lloyd Senger in a letter from Vol. 6 No. 2.

pointed out that Howard Donahue, in trying

to duplicate Oswald's alleged shooting feat,

bested the allotted 5.6 second time, hitting

his target 3 times in 5.2 seconds. This is true,

and it does make the feat possible. But does it

help to make it probable? When it came to

trying to duplicate the shooting, expert after

expert failed, even when given an easier

attempt. These are the facts: When the War-

ren Commission tried to duplicate it, they

used stationary targets. None of their marks-

men could equal the feat. The FBI used a 30-

foot perch (half the height of the 6th-floor

window). Again, no one could equal the feat. In 1967, CBS set up their own firing test.

They used a 60-foot perch, they had the

"car" travel in a straight line and at a steady

rate of 11 mph. Eleven marksmen made 37

attempts. 17 trials were declared "no time

meaning that marksmen could not get off

the three shots in time. When CBS measured

the average shooting time, these 17 trials

were discarded. Despite the fact that their

"vehicle" traveled at a steady rate (JFK's Lim-

ousine did not) and that the targets did not

move within the vehicle (JFK slumped down

and to his right), and that oversized targets

were used, all but one of the marksmen failed

to duplicate the shooting. One man suc-

ceeded. So it is possible, but how does the

failure of many experts, many given advan-

taged trials, make it probable that Lee

Oswald, called "a rather poor shot" by the US

Marines, pulled off the crime of the century?

The JFK assassination is inundated with

hearsay, myths and theories, to be sure, but if you stick with only the facts, it is quite

improbable and very unlikely that this "poor

shot" using a cheap and ineffective weapon,

assassinated the President. The facts say oth-

erwise. (Source: A Citizen's Dissent by Mark

Lane, in which he quotes The Warren

Commission and the transcript of the CBS

Inquiry of the Warren Report, 1967).

—Roger Leonardis. New York City,

113B@Prodigy.net

ASSASSINATION SCIENCE

A friend recently sent me a copy of the piece

by Nick Gerlich on "November in Dallas:' in

which he implies that all conspiracy theories

are false. I am unclear as to whether Gerlich

holds this to be a necessary truth that could

not possibly be false (as a matter of defini-

tion, for example) or as a contingent truth

that could be false (if only history were

different, for example). But it ought to be

apparent that, absent this premise, his con-

clusions about JFK do not follow. If such

beliefs can be rational, perhaps most Amer-

icans are not paranoid, after all. As a profes-

sor of philosophy who has taught courses in

logic, critical thinking, and informal fallacies

for nearly 30 years, I would like to know if

Gerlich considers the bombing of Cambo-

dia, Watergate, or the Iran-Contra Affair to

have been conspiracies? The restoration of

the Shah of Iran to the Peacock Throne? The

destabilization of Chile and the murder of

Salvador Allende? The death of Lincoln or

attempts on his Vice President and Secretary

of State? More recently, many of us have

heard about a vast right-wing conspiracy to

drive President Clinton from office (from

the left) and about a White House conspir-

acy to tarnish the reputation of Republican

leaders (from the right). Conspiracies

appear to he as common as apple pie. The

existence or non-existence of conspiracies in

specific cases has to be evaluated on the

basis of the available relevant evidence. The

assassination of-JFK appears to have been a

large-scale conspiracy covered up through

sophisticated techniques, including the

fabrication of X-rays, the substitution of

drawings and photographs of a brain,

and extensive editing of the Zapruder

film, as my book, Assassination Science

(1998), explains. None of this should affect

Gerlich, however, whose mind is dearly

closed. If he is consistent, 1 predict he shall

soon advise us that Julius Caesar was also

killed by a lone, demented assassin.

—James H. Fetzer, McKnight Professor,

University of Minnesota, Duluth, MN 55812,

jfetzer@d_umn.edu

awls imo Nesinanoirenc• gm.", mat

.fan. WU

Pin- - Actual site

SUPPORT THE JAMES HANOI EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION AND GET SOME GREAT JREF STUFF!

•

• Mug—fron(11 beak

All prices include shipping and handling...

❑ 0 PEN. Writes in any language. Sexy maroon color. trimmed in homeopathic gold. Takes standard refills. (S7 US, Canada, & Europe) 171 () T-SHIRT with a fierce portrait of James Randi on it. ($17. US, $22. Canada. no. Europe) Please circle size: S - M L - XL

E 0 PIGASUS PIN-burnished metal in tie tack style. ($8.50 US & Canada, Europe)

E ® CERAMIC COFFEE MUG with spiffy inscription. For indoor or outdoor use. Reusable, washable. Grey with blue artwork. (51.3.00 US, $16.00 Canada. $18.00 Europe)

km.*

ADDRESS

PHONE All payments so be nude in US. dollars by check money order.Visa or D AdasaerCard. For credit card payment. please provide information below . ;meat- GAADHOt.DER'S NAME

ACCOUNT

tae DATE

James Randi Educational Foundation

201 SE 12TH STREET (E. DAVF &w.),

FORT LAUDERDALE. FL 33316-1815 PHONE: 1 (954)467-1112 FAX: 1(954)457-1660

E-nest: RANDICRAIIDLORG

V01.6, No 4. 1998 25

T EX A t'Sdi--10.6E.,:12101Dii 4-7.:46i4wA.

•

"."

rea.,41E

'•

ZAP DE4

e

IHIRTY-FTVE YEARS AGO, JOHN F.

KENNEDY was killed in Dallas,

Texas. Lee Harvey Oswald, an

enigmatic drifter who had once

defected to Russia and then re-

defected to the United States,

was charged with the murder. Two days

later, he was gunned down by lack Ruby. And life has not been the same

ever since.

Those three days are likely the most analyzed time period in U.S. history.

Virtually every action and reaction has

been scrutinized under a magnifying

glass. How could Oswald have done

this? Did he act alone? Or was there

more than one killer? Could a lone nut

take out the most powerful man on

Earth? How could someone put an

end to Camelot?

The social setting was ripe for fears

of conspiracy. The Cold War was at its height. Russia's Khrushchev and

Cuba's Fidel Castro loved to engage in

saber rattling. Robert Kennedy, the

President's younger brother, had

declared war on the Mafia. And various

right-wing groups in the U.S. were

upset by Kennedy's support for racial integration and felt the Bay of Pigs

invasion had been bungled.

These fears and uncertainties, along with the inscrutable Oswald. opened

the door for a rash of conspiracy theories. Oswald had dozens of

bizarre relationships and odd incidents attached to his name, each one seemingly implicating him in a conspiracy to kill the President.

It was all too easy to think that someone else was involved. Any

number of individuals or groups had both motive and means to kill

the president, either with or without Oswald.

If ever there were a person of questionable character or back-

ground, it was Oswald. Here was a man who had embraced extrem-ist political ideology and campaigned publicly in favor of Castro,

who had used an alias in ordering a rifle from a mail order com-

pany, and who posed in his backyard brandishing firearms and pro-

paganda leaflets.

Skeptics of the Warren Commission report have speculated

widely (and wildly) that Oswald must have had backers from the far

right, or even that he was a fall guy for a subversive plot to kill the

president. Others have postulated that there were multiple Oswalds,

with decoys being used in various places to leave a confusing trail of

evidence. But the facts simply do not bear this out. While many have been

swept up in the IFK conspiracy hyste-

ria (over 2000 books have been pub-

lished on the subject since his death), a

careful analysis confirms, in my opin-

ion, that Oswald acted alone.

After 35 years, there is little that's

new to be added. Occasionally a "wit-

ness" - ness comes forward (either with a

new book, or in an expose in the National Enquirer), to announce that

they were involved with the assassina-

tion, or that they knew Oswald, Ruby,

or one of the other unsavory charac-

ters, Recently-released documents

shed some light on aspects of the aecac-

sination, but as the author of the defin-

itive Ione-assassin book, Gerald

Posner, pointed out on a Today Show

interview on October I, 1998, the doc-uments merely help explain some of

the anomalies in the case. For example, much has been made of why the

autopsy was conducted under such a

veil of secrecy and intrigue. It turns

out, says Posner, that the Kennedy fam-

ily

did not want anyone to discover

that the President was suffering from

Addison's disease during his Presi-

dency, not to mention the gruesome

nature of the corpse photographs—an

explanation that is, even by conspirato-

rialists' standards, certainly understandable. These new documents

do nothing to change Posner's (or my) conclusion that Oswald was the only assassin in Dealey Plaza that day. The case is still dosed.

The purpose of this article is to examine the many truths and

non-truths surrounding the IFK assassination, and to take a closer

look at some of the circumstances that led people to believe a con-

spiracy had occurred. I will explore some of the most frequently

cited aspects of the case and consider the controversial elements of

each. After pursuing this story now for many, many years, I have come to one definitive, irrefutable conclusion I believe will not

change. the JFK assassination case will never be put to rest. Whether

the case is really dosed, as think it is, or still open pending proof of

a second smoking gun, many people just cannot seem to let it go.

The president's body was buried in 1963, but the intrigue surround-

ing his death, like its emotional counterpart in the images of his

good looks and inimitable charm, has not and likely never will be

interred. The mystery has become more powerful than its solution.

4D

SKEPTIC

THE ZAPRUDER FILM

Perhaps the best-known and most-analyzed piece of evidence from

the assassination is the Zapruder film. It is the best of several film

recordings of the Presidential motorcade as it wound its way

through downtown Dallas.

Abraham Zapruder, a Dallas dressmaker, unwittingly stepped

into American history with his then-high tech capture of the event

At the time, 8mm film cameras were rising in popularity and

Zapruder became one of the first Americans to document a crime

with this method of technology.

Perched on the grassy knoll just a few hundred feet from the

Texas School Book Depository, Zapruder stood poised to film the

president as he made the curve down Elm Street just before the

triple underpass leading to the Stemmons Freeway. The gentle bend

in the road allowed Zapruder an excellent angle for photography; -

were it not for a highway sign, his film would have been totally

unobscured.

The Zapruder film, which recently became available in VHS

and DVD format, showed one thing that caught conspiracy-buffs'

attention: the forward motion of the President's body following the

first bullet to hit him, and then the backward jerking motion of

Kennedy's head, with flesh and blood splattering toward the back of

the limousine. C-buffs concluded that the second hit must therefore

have come from behind Zapruder, possibly behind the picket fence

on the grassy knoll.

But speculation about the Zapruder film did not end there. The

day after the assassination, Zapruder sold all rights to the film to Life

magazine for the then-impressive sum of $150,000. Some extreme

skeptics of the Warren Commission feel that this is where the case

went awry. Harrison Livingstone (1992), for example, contends that

the film was then tinkered with, in a frame-by-frame fashion to alter

the placement of the head wound Livingstone contends that

Kennedy was shot in the neck from the front, and then in the head

simultaneously from two different directions ( the second assassin

stationed in a manhole just down the road from Kennedy).

Livingstone's wildest fantasy is that the film is not authentic. He

contends that the CIAs photographic division processed and

printed the film the night of the assassination, and that Zapruder

was actually a minor footnote in history, a possessor of a mere copy

of the now-altered originaL The CIA, Livingstone contends, had the

means in the early 1960s to add, delete, and rearrange frames, as well

as add special effects. The film shown to the Warren Commission

and to the American public was thus a fake, carefully reconstructed

to bolster the lone gunman argument. Similarly, Groden and Liv-

ingstone (1989), Litton (1980), and numerous others argue that the

film has been spliced, with numerous frames now out of sequence.

They use the fact that the movie camera shot at the rate of 183

frames per second to help build a time line, and then compare it to

the time required to operate Oswald's weapon, the pre-WWII

Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action rifle.

As Posner (1993) points out, though, it was not only possible for

Oswald to fire three shots in under six seconds, it was also a quite

manageable feat. He cites the House Select Committee's 1977 sim-

ulation which showed that only 3.3 seconds were needed to squeeze

off three effective shots if the first bullet was already loaded in the

chamber. The awkward bolt action of the rifle was not as much of a

problem as the critics claim it is.

The critical Zapruder frame was #313, the moment at which

Kennedy's head virtually exploded. Nearly everyone is in agreement

that this records the final shot. Working backwards, analysts con-

cluded that no more than six seconds elapsed between the film

image on Elm Street just dear of the large oak tree in front of the

Texas School Book Depository sniper's nest and the spot where

frame #313 was captured.

But Posner, analyzing both ear-witness reports and an enhanced

Zapruder film, shows that Oswald fired his first shot at frame ;160,

before the President's car was obscured by the large tree. Further-

more, Posner shows that the first shot entirely missed Kennedy, but

that the second and third shots hit their target

Of the various interpretations and analyzes of the Zapruder

film, Posner's makes the most sense. He shows that Zapruder

slightly jerked the camera around frame ;160, coincident with a

possible first shot. Zapruder altogether made four slight twitches

with the camera, including one at frame #313.

Furthermore, the notion that Dealey Plaza was literally crawling

with snipers is preposterous. Gunmen were supposed to be hiding

in manholes, behind picket fences, or atop other nearby buildings.

While it may be possible for one person to go unseen, for two or

more to do so becomes far less likely. For an entire posse of marks-

men to leave the Plaza unnoticed is a flight of fancy.

The compact, bowl-like terrain in the Plaza makes it easy for

spectators to mistakenly attribute the source of various sounds. The

tall buildings and other features create disorienting echoes, thus

explaining why people in the Plaza started running toward the

grassy knoll following the final shot.

Finally, to allege conspiratorial alteration of the Zapruder film

by the CIA is totally unfounded. There is no proof that the CIA or

anyone else had possession of the film, and until such proof exists,

we can conclude only one thing—Zapruder's camera did not

blink

While amateur filming of newsworthy events is today part and

parcel of our electronic age, Zapruder will be remembered as one of

the first to record a significant event on film. His footage is a

remarkable and graphic record of the assassination, and thanks to

modern computer enhancements, it serves as proof positive that the

two shots that hit Kennedy came from behind him, not from else-

where in the Plaza.

No.4.1998 41

THE MAGIC BULLET

If anything has given conspiracy advocates fuel for their engine (and

even something to snicker about, to boot), it is the so-called 'magic

bullet theory" According to the Warren Commission, only three

shots were fired, and the first of those three shots entirely missed its

target. Both of the next two bullets struck President Kennedy, the

last one causing his head to explode. The effect of this third bullet is

not in question.

The second bullet fired is the problematic one. in addition to

the president being struck, Governor Connally, riding in front of the president, was also hit The second shot causes problems for the

"Oswald did it alone" theory since bullet number two hit both Kennedy and Connally, According to the Commission, the bullet

first entered the President's upper back and exited through his

throat, and then, continuing its downward trajectory, it entered

Connally behind his right armpit., shattered his fifth rib, exited his

chest below the right nipple, shattered his right wrist, and finally

lodged in his left thigh.

The "fake right, go left" tenor of this account begins to sound like a trick high school football play, and has conspiracy buffs

writhing with laughter at the prospect of a bullet that could do som- ersaults in flight, as well as turn on a dime. To add another gi e to

the laugh track, the bullet managed to wiggle out of Connally's thigh, and was later found on a stretcher in the hospital corridor, in

nearly perfect condition (the so-called magic or pristine bullet is

more appropriately referred to as Commission Exhibit 399), It is

argued that this single bullet could not have done all this damage, so

there must have been an additional sniper shooting at that time,

and, hence, a conspiracy.

Pro-conspiracy devotees use the so-called Magic Bullet theory

as one of their main arguments that the Warren Commission's find-

ings are false. To them, it is utterly preposterous to propose that a single bullet fired from a dated, WWII rifle could perform the darn-age it did while dancing through Kennedy and Connally, There is no

shortage of theorists who have examined the Magic Bullet, as well_

as Dealey Plaza, and they invariably come up with more than three

bullets being fired, mostly because they will not accept the Warren

Side and bottom views of Warren Commission Exhibit 399—otherwise known as the "magic" or 'pristine bullet. From the side the bullet appears unaltered except for a small amount 01 lead that has been squeezed past the bottom edge of the copper jacket. The end-on view reveals the lorrnerly round bullet is lar from pristine.

Commission's conclusions on the pristine bullet. Typical of these critics is Roberts (1994), a former Marine sniper in the Vietnam

War, who dismisses the Commission's finding on the grounds that,

because he could not duplicate the feat, it did not happen.

But as preposterous as the Magic Bullet theory may sound to

even the lone gunman camp, it is the best conclusion we have. Of all

the aspects of the assassination picked apart by the Commission

and its critics, the path of the bullets fired in Dealey Plaza has been

diagramed with exacting detail, taking into account everything—

the pitch of the road, the live oak tree partially obstructing Oswald's

view from the sixth story of the Texas School Book Depository

(which was still bearing leaves in late November), the speed of the

limousine, the positions of both Kennedy and Connally in the lim-

ousine, and the location of entry and exit wounds in both persons.

As Posner showed by examination of the Zapruder film, it was

possible for Oswald (or anyone else experienced with rifles, for that

matter) to squeeze off the three necessary shots with the Mannlicher-Carcano. Posner also shows convincingly that the sec-

ond shot hit both men.

Complicating the issue significantly were conflicting reports from the Governor himself, as well as his wife. At first, Connally

thought he was hit by a separate shot, as did Mrs. Connally. But a

careful frarne-hy-frame analysis of the Zapruder film revealed some important details For example, in Frame 224, there is evidence that

both men were hit. Given that they were only sitting two feet apart,

and the bullet was traveling at almost 2000 feet per second, it stands

to reason that they must both show signs of being hit at nearly or precisely the same moment.

The tell-tale evidence is that the governor's right lapel flips up in

Frame 229, in the exact location where a bullet traversed his body. Furthermore, by Frame 226, the governor is rigid, and in Frames

227-229, there is a jiggling of his Stetson hat, which he was holding

with his right hand (also hit by the bullet). In real time, Connally jig-gled his hat in under one-tenth of a second, and his face reacted in

pain in two-thirds of a second- Posner cites this as proof positive

that both men were hit at the same time.

But this still did not conclusively prove that one bullet and one

shot inflicted all this damage, for two bullets fired at the same time

could conceivably have done the same thing. Once again, Posner

presents evidence that just one bullet did the damage, as shown in a

simulation by Dr. Robert Piziali, who oversaw the tests conducted

by the Failure Analysis Association, a firm specializing in computer

recreations for lawsuits. Piziali's investigation answered two impor-

tant questions: did one bullet alone hit both men, and was this bul-

let was fired from the Texas School Book Depository? Critics

notwithstanding, Piziali showed in his recreation that the position

of the men was such that the seemingly strange path of the bullet indeed was not only possible, but certain.

42 SKEPTIC

A. Entry wound in right shoulder

was Pie long—the exact length

of She bullet—indicating the bullet

was tumbling end over end

Exit wound below the right

nipple was large— nearly 2' in diameter— and ragged., the bullet

was still lumblmg.

The path of the second bullet as explained in Gerald Posner's book Case Closed. The diagram has been redrawn from pp 478-479 and captions labeling events of the bullets passage also are from pp.47B-479 at Case Closed.

.1\

Bullet speed 4XY second

Entry wound at top of right wrist was

ragged and irregular. The bullet, now t eveling backward, fractured the radius bone.

s„,ty,

Bullet grazed tip of a vertebra in the neck, slightly splintering the Bone.

Cavity momentarily caused by the bullet's passage Traverses chest

and shatterS fifth right rib

' Buller speed

900Y second

When the bullet came to rest in

Connally's len thigh, having lost more than 54% of its

velocity, it was lust able to

penetrate skin.

KENNEDY (

at% ".retooce

Entry wound ft**. in the bask- 6.5mm in diameter Exit

wound in throat Bullet speed

1.5101-1,600'/ second

CONNALLY

Bullet II now tumbling

E - n

Limousine lump seat

? wee! mono—/Sore Is a valid question as to whether she thee 'Keine was a result sl Inc back shot 5/ the Ver.M. sea

Traisebey horn SW correr window of lasso School hw Depository

sin rib sin=

1

Contrasting views of the wounding of Kennedy and Connally

Dramno B is the overhead view of Posner's scenario A. The bullet passes in a straight line through both men until it strikes Connally's fifth rib. Redrawn from Posner's Case Closed, p.479.

In drawing C the shot that wounds Kennedy misses Connally. Dia-gram redrawn, and captions taken from Robert J. Groden and Diane J. Allen's The Killing of A President: Dealey Pfaza Memorial Edition, Rotten Groden was a consultant for the Oliver Stone film JFK and writes and lectures extensively on the JFK assassination, The lavishly Illustrated The Killing of A President and many other mate-rials that present a case for an assassination conspiracy are available horn: Robert J. Groden. P.O. Box 823497. Dallas Texas 75382.

I think we can all agree with the conspiracy advocates that it is

impossible for bullets to make abrupt turns mid-flight But some

simple facts are usually overlooked along the war the governor was

not sitting in a "normal" seat in front of the President; he was on a

"jump seat" located in the large area between the back and front

seats. Furthermore, this was a parade, and both Kennedy and Con-

nally were busy twisting from side to side, making eye contact with

and waving to the crowd.

Posner also addressed the issue of whether the magic bullet was

indeed pristine. Examination of the missile showed it to be in less-

than-perfect condition, somewhat bent and flattened_ It was not

nearly as pristine as critics claim when they seek to ridicule the

Commission's findings. Agreed, the bullet was not severely

deformed, but this is because it was a jacketed military bullet which

performed precisely as it was supposed to: if no major organs are

struck, it is supposed to pass through the victim's body directly,

without inflicting major bodily damage. Following the Geneva

Convention of 1922, such metal jacketed bullets were mandated for

war as a more "humane" method of combat

But why did the Wan-en Commission have a test bullet that,

when fired into a cadaver's wrist, showed extensive deformation?

Because the Commission did not precisely recreate the shot. Rather

than being the first thing hit by the bullet, the governor's wrist was

the last thing hit By then, the bullet had slowed considerably. If the

bullet had only hit Connally's wrist, it likely would have appeared as

the test bullet did. But this was not the case, as shown by the evidence.

The truth is, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to perfectly

recreate the shooting situation for test shots. To have a test bullet

Vio,.6. No 4. 1998 43

pass through one cadaver and then into another in the exact path

followed by the real bullet would be a long-shot proposition indeed.

Rather, it is more expedient to accept the fortuitous route of this

one bullet While Oswald may not have targeted the governor, he

accidentally managed to hit two heads of government with one sin-

gle shot. That the bullet was in reasonably good shape following the

ordeal is not the issue.

THE MAFIA, CIA, AND OTHER ROGUE ELEMENTS

The early 1960s were rife with various groups that had instilled fear

in the hearts of Americans, The Mafia, which had been singled out

by the president's younger brother Robert for scrutiny, has been

implicated by Scheim (1988) and Davis (1989) as having both

motive and method to rub out the President North (1991) argues

for a J. Edgar Hoover role in the assassination. Lane (1991) and

Weberrnan and Canfield (1975) propose that the CIA was involved,

as does Morrow (1992) in his tell-all confessional account. Sum-

mers (1980) fingers the Cubans (although conspiracy devotees are

divided as to whether they were pro-Castro or anti-Castro). If any

group or individual had a hidden side to them, they were invariably

accused of at least a passing involvement in the asgassination.

A wealth of books have been published which try to implicate

various parties. In most cases, the authors promote their personal

agendas, so they indict the opposing party of their choice. One of

the most comprehensive examinations of means, motives, and

opportunities is provided by Marrs (1989), who calls on the carpet,

one by one, the Russians, the Cubans (both pro- and anti-Castro),

the Mafia, the CIA, the FBI, the military industrial complex, and

"rednecks and oilmen." The only stone left unturned by Marrs is an

alien involvement (but he did suggest in his 1997 Alien Agenda that

other-worldly influences were at work in Roswell).

It is interesting to note all of the various individuals and groups

that are fingered in conspiracy theories, for they demonstrate many

of the fears prevalent in America, both then and now. There is one

thing all had in common: they represent the darker side of life in the

early 1960s. The Cuba component in the equation, for example, is

understandable in this context_ With the bungled Bay of Pigs oper-

ation and failed CIA attempts to kill Castro, it is not a particularly

long stretch to conclude that Fidel was trying to exact revenge by

killing the president It was not beyond the realm of possibility that

Castro could have had mercenaries in Dallas on that fateful day.

Neither was it impossible for anti-Castro zealots, angered at our

failure at the Bay of Pigs, to have targeted Kennedy to get back at

what they saw as his backing away from eliminating Castro for

them. There were anti-Castro encampments in both Miami and

New Orleans in the early-1960s, and, it is theorized, any of these

groups could have made a road trip to Dallas.

And what about Khruschev? Hadn't the U.S. violated Russia's

territory with the Gary Powers U2 incident? The U.S. was embroiled

in a bad case of saber-rattling with the USSR, and we were falling

behind in the space race. Fallout shelters were the family room of

the 1950s, and the prospects of a nuclear war loomed large in the

minds of many. In a Spy vs. Spy era, the idea that Khnischev could

have been behind a plot to kill the President seemed plausible to the

Russophobic.

Then there are those who think that the CIA was behind the

assassination, partly because of the Bay of Pigs affair, and partly

because of the escalating conflict in southeast Asia. The CIAs Direc-

tor, Allen Dulles, was not particularly happy about what happened

(and did not happen) in Cuba. It is argued that the CIA, the most

visible of U.S. intelligence agencies, was disturbed that the president

was soft on our enemies, and was chomping at the bit to show our

military prowess.

Related to this is the argument that the military industrial com-

plex, a hodgepodge of large companies with lucrative defense con-

tracts, was also anxious to see if their high-tech weaponry could

really work The embarrassment in Cuba was a thorn in their side,

and some conspiracy advocates see this as the entree for the defense

industry to dispose of a leader who shied away from confrontation.

Other conspiracy theorists point to I. Edgar Hoover, the erst-

while Director of the FBI. Not one to be ruled or restrained, Hoover

was not particularly pleased with the way Kennedy and Company

were leading the country. Thus, we are left with suggestions that

Hoover orchestrated the assassination.

The Mafia cannot be overlooked, either. The President's

younger brother Robert had declared war on the Mafia. Why kill

Jack when Robert was the aggressor? Conspiracy theorists love to

recite an old mantra about getting rid of the dog that wags the tail—

get rid of the dog, and the tail goes with it. lack was the target, in

order to silence Bobby. That the Mafia was often suspected of

involvement is not surprising. During that time, the Mafia was par-

ticularly strong in many U.S. cities, including New Orleans and Dal-

las. Given allegations of the President's infidelities as well as his

relations with people suspected of mob connections, the plot thick-

ens. The name that pops up the most is Carlos Marcello, the New

Orleans "Mafia Kingfish" (Davis 1989).

Finally, in an all-out exhaustive effort to implicate anyone with

a passing interest in national politics, right-wing extremists, red-

necks, oilmen, and the like are accused of silencing Kennedy. After

all, conservatives had placed large critical ads in local newspapers

concurrent with the President's visit to Dallas Furthermore, Texas is

and was a very conservative ,state, and Kennedy stood for many

things that did not sit well with "proper" Texans.

in spite of all the well-worded treatises on whodunit, none can

go further than basic innuendo. It is quite easy to suggest that a per-

son or organization had means, motive, and opportunity. But that

does not prove the complicity of anyone. Tossing around names of

possible conspirators, but without the proof to back it up, is like say-

ing that October's Hurricane Mitch was really a Contra plot to get

4d SKEPTIC

—James Randi

" ...entertaining,

enlightening, strongly recommend."

—Martin Gardner

8o1ioging hi P34011,9161,001p5iifigtstiliona

back at the Sandinistas.

As it stands, none of these individuals or organizations had

much to gain by disposing of Kennedy. In fact, most had much to

lose by doing so. Khruschev could have started a nuclear war if he

had been behind the plot. Castro would have invited a more seri-

ous military invasion if he were involved. The anti-Castroites

would not have solved any of their problems by removing

Kennedy. And if the CIA or FBI were involved, it would mean that

we were at Civil War once again.

Perhaps it is in our nature to pin blame on other powers—

particularly powers that are nefarious or fear-inspiring. But unless

proof positive can be supplied, the conjectures are mere specula-

tion, and entertaining at best.

OSWALD IN NEW ORLEANS

Another line of argument against the Oswald-only account is the

strange trail he left before the assassination occurred, particularly

in New Orleans, Oswald's behavior was so strange in The Big Easy

that many conspiracy advocates use it as the focal point of their

work New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (1988) was so

convinced of Oswald's connections there that Garrison staged a

post-mortem trial in 1967 to try to prove a conspiracy. And Hol-

lywood's biggest conspiratorialist, Oliver Stone, used Garrison's

case as the centerpiece of his pro-conspiracy JFK film.

There is no question that Oswald at one time lived in New

Orleans. It is what he did, or might have done, in New Orleans that

has conspiring minds churning out theories. Admittedly, Oswald

led a strange life in New Orleans. Some of the various "eyewitness"

accounts of his activities and associations are of dubious value

(such as his alleged trip to Clinton, Louisiana, with two other men

to participate in a voter registration drive). But with "shady" char-

acters such as Guy Bannister. David Ferric, and Clay Shaw walking

the streets of New Orleans, as well as Carlos Marcello's henchmen

ruling the underworld, it is easy to lump to conclusions. Never

mind that Oswald made public appearances espousing his sup-

port of Castro's Cuba. Oswald single-handedly formed a local

chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (albeit an imaginary

one, not recognized by the national organization), and paid for

and distributed leaflets promoting Fidel Castro (his new hero, fol-

lowing his disenchantment with Soviet socialism).

Garrison's discovery that Oswald was using an address, 544

Camp Street, that was "in the very heart of the local intelligence

community (Garrison I 988)," propelled an investigation that did

not end until Garrison was deflated in a courtroom. Marrs (1989)

argues that it was at this address that the paths of Oswald, the FBI,

the CIA, anti-Castro Cubans, and the Mafia all crossed (a strange

intersection, indeed ).

Bannister was a former FBI agent with ties to Naval Intelli-

gence who had become a private investigator. One of his frequent

Connecticut Col egiPsycholo6 Professrir Stuart A. Vyse exam- ines current behavioral research that suggests that everyday superstitions are the natural result of several well-understood psychological processes. Vyse entertaingly demonstrates how complex and paradoxical human behaviors can be understood through scientific investigation, and profiles personality traits associated with superstition and the role of superstitious beliefs in ones actions. Vyse acknowledges that superstition is a normal part of human culture, but suggests we learn to crit-ically evaluate the source of our beliefs in order to develop alternative methods to coping with life's lithe, yet sometimes overwhelming, uncertainties. A significant contribution to the skeptical literature that should be in every skeptics' library.

Stuart Vyse on: Chain letters:

"Now, if we very cautiously estimate that only two of 29 recipients would

actually continue the chain, the number of participants in a year circula-

tion is equal to 245 or 35,184,372,988,832 (this is 35 million millions).

Obviously, this number tar exceeds the population at the planet (which is

approximately 5.3 billion)."

Triskaidekaphobia (fear of the number 13): "In France there is a company that provides emergency guests for dinner

parties to make sure 13 people never sit at one table,"

Superstition and Gender: "A large number of studies have shown that women are more superstitious and have a greater belief in paranormal phenomena than men...Psychologists

Jerome Tobacyk and Gary Milford found that college women had a greater

belief in precogrittion...but men showed significantly greater belief in extraor-

dinary lite forms, such as Bigioot and the Loch Ness monster."

Order on the cola* tear cart at the iron? of the magazine Beffevyng fa Magic The Psychology of

Superstition B1 Stuart Vyse125.00 Hardback 259 pages. Mord University Press. Ho. 858HB

Nn. 4. 1998 — 4 5

visitors was Ferric, who was a fervent anti-Communist (and a quite

memorable person, given his colorful hairpiece). Both Bannister and Ferrie did work for anti-Castro groups and Marcello's attorney.

Conspiracy advocates frequently cite the testimony of Delphine Roberts, Bannister's former secretary. Roberts testified that Oswald

had visited Bannister's office several times. As Posner (1993)

showed, though, Roberts' testimony was of questionable value.

Roberts' daughter, with the same name and who worked in the

same building on Camp Street, said that Oswald kept his pro-Cuba

pamphlets in an office at that address, and that he came there fre-

quently and knew Bannister. Posner dismisses Oswald's connections to 544 Camp Street as

merely a false address used by Oswald (he likely walked past the

building many times, and could have chosen that address from

among many), or an effort by Oswald to besmirch the name of a

fervent anti-Castro group that had a legitimate office at that address

one year prior. Furthermore, as Posner points out, it is unlikely that

Oswald could have afforded the rent on Camp Street.

Did Oswald know Ferric? Some pro-conspiracy writers say that

Oswald knew Ferrie in 1955, when Oswald was in the Civil Air

Patrol. Garrison and others allege that Ferric initiated Oswald into

the CIA. The only problem with these hypotheses is that Ferric had been relieved of his duties with the CAP for several years in the mid-

1950s, and did not resume working in that capacity until 1958 (Pos-ner 1993).

Oswald's supposed trip to Clinton, LA, is even more far-fetched.

'Witnesses" placed him there in the company of Ferrie and Clay Shaw, a New Orleans businessman. This being Garrison's turf, he

hunted far and wide for persons who could place Oswald in the

company of these questionable characters. The event in Clinton was

characteristic of the changing social milieu: blacks were being

encouraged to register to vote, and the voter drive in Clinton had brought out numerous blacks to register, and many whites to make

sure that blacks weren't being encouraged too much. Garrison's six

witnesses reported seeing the unusual spectacle of a white man

standing in line with blacks. That this white man arrived in Clinton

in an expensive car with two other white companions makes the

appearance even more intriguing.

Garrison's witnesses, however, were discredited by Posner, who

showed that Garrison's team had to coax and coach the witnesses extensively to get their stories straight. But there were other incon-

sistencies with the eyewitness accounts, such as the timing of the incident (it could not have been in October, when Oswald no longer lived in New Orleans). Numerous internal contradictions render the Clinton story a probable falsehood.

The fact that many people swore they saw Oswald in a variety

of locations and in the company of a number shady characters after

they had seen Oswald in the news following the assassination is not at all surprising. It is akin to the difference between recall and recog-

nition in advertising research. Of the two, recall is certainly the most

powerful indicator of an ad's ability to maintain top-of-mind

prominence. Recall tests are open-ended questions, with no cues for the respondent. Recognition, however, only requires respondents to

declare if they remember seeing or hearing a particular advertise-

ment. In order to avoid looking stupid and inattentive, people are

likely to overstate what they think they saw or heard. With television

broadcasting Oswald's likeness into the living rooms of millions of

Americans, it is therefore not surprising that many people swore

they saw Oswald in a variety of potentially compromising and

indicting acts. His face indelibly etched on the minds of an emo-

tionally upset public, it is to be expected that Oswald sightings came

from all corners.

But given the chance encounters that we have with hundreds

of people daily, it is unlikely that anyone could remember a

stranger they saw today, much less months or years prior. Even if

a person engaged in particularly memorable behaviors, it is

doubtful that "witnesses" would be able to recall more than very

general information. In other words, unless there is a specific reason to focus on the

physical features of a person (like someone robbing a bank, or a

physical attacker), we are not likely recall many specific details of our

day. For example, we are exposed daily to hundreds and even thou-sands of advertising stimuli, yet it is unlikely that we could accu-

rately name even five that we encountered in the last 24 hours.

Oswald sightings would have been much easier (and more reliable)

in the 1990s, when camcorders, TV crews, and public observation

cameras became commonplace. But that was not the case in 1963,

when a small percentage of people (like Zapruder) had the means

to document events on film.

Of one thing we are certain, though: Oswald did pass out pro-

Castro leaflets in New Orleans, and Oswald was arrested for

disturbing the peace in a confrontation with anti-Castro activists.

There is photographic proof of this, as well as the police record_ But

as for Oswald's other alleged New Orleans connections and activi-

ties, we can only conclude that they probably did not happen. With-out definitive evidence, the Oswald-Bannister-Ferrie triad is more

wishful thinking than reality.

THE MANY FAt1a OF I .FF HARVEY OSWALD

Yet another wrinkle in the Oswald case is his use of aliases, as well as speculation that he (or a "second" Oswald) made carefully-staged

public appearances in Louisiana, limas, and even Mexico City. More

questions surround his double defection between the U.S. and Rus-sia in the 1950s.

The Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action rifle that Oswald used to

kill Kennedy was purchased from a mail-order firm. Oswald would

likely never have caused such a stir if he had simply used his real name. Instead, he used "A. Hidell," unwittingly helping pro-conspir-

acy theorists. Furthermore, he had ordered Fair Play for Cuba liter-

46 SHEPTIC

ature in New Orleans using the name Lee Osborne, but stamped

these documents with his A. I. Hidell alias (Posner 1993).

If anyone involved in the assassination warrants a dose investi-

gation, it is Oswald himself. Here is a man who left behind a con-

fusing trail: a disruptive childhood, a military career that took him

to some decidedly sensitive places (e.g., Atsugi, Japan, the base for

the U2), disenchantment with capitalism, defection to the USSR.

disenchantment with Soviet socialism, re-defection to the U.S., and

public support of Castro's Cuba. If ever there were a person of ques-

tionable character, it was Oswald.

Was Oswald an agent for either the U.S. or the USSR (or both)?

While it may be possible, it is doubtful. Oswald had proven himself

in years past to be unstable, not exactly the right trait for a spy. He

lacked the raw intelligence and discretion necessary for such a role,

and seemingly left an intentional trail of evidence behind that led

straight to him.

If anything, Oswald was a disgruntled idealist. Dissatisfied with

capitalism and its inherent social and economic inequities, he left

for the USSR. There, he met his wife, Marina, but did not find the

utopia he sought. Political drifter that he was, he returned to his

homeland, not so much because he embraced its ideologies, but

more likely because he had no place better to go.

Back in the U.S., he took up Castro's cause. But he was hard to

take seriously, for here was an American, an Anglo at that, publicly

promoting the policies of a perceived despot. It is no wonder that he

attracted attention in New Orleans when he was handing out

leaflets.

Conspiracy theorists love to bring up the back yard pho-

tographs taken by Oswald's wife. There, in his Oak Cliff neighbor-

hood of Dallas, Oswald posed in the bright sunlight holding the

Mannlicher-Carcano and various leftist newsletters. Critics contend

that the photos were dever fakes, meant to indict Oswald. They

argue that Oswald's face was photographically superimposed on

another photo.

If JFK had been killed in 1998, this would have been a very

believable proposition. With photo retouching software such as

Photoshop widely available, it would have taken only a few mouse

clicks to put Oswald's face on another person's body. But JFK was

killed in 1963. While it was technically feasible for someone with

darkroom and retouching experience to compile a photographic

collage, analysis of the photos does not support this. As Posner

points out, the grains in the photo are consistent throughout, prov-

ing that there had been no juxtaposition of faces and bodies. In real-

ity, the photos show a person with a twisted mentality, bent on

proving something.

Oswald sightings in Dallas and other parts of Texas are about as

common as are his "sightings" in Louisiana. Once his face was

broadcast, it seemed that everyone had seen Oswald...test-driving

a car, practicing at a shooting range, in the company of

Cubans...even appearing at a U.S. embassy in Mexico City. While it

is likely that Oswald did get around the Dallas Metro area I after all,

he had a job and tried to lead some semblance of a "normal" life),

these reported sightings are probably just colorful imaginations.

What is strange is that Oswald left the damning photographs

behind of his backyard poses, yet tried to cover his trail by using

aliases in other instances. If anything, this illustrates his mental

instability. At one moment, he tries to cover his trail in New Orleans

by purchasing his tracts with an assumed name (and using several

addresses for his pro-Cuba committee chapter), but then is naive

enough to get arrested for disturbing the peace while promoting the

same cause. Furthermore, while he used an alias to purchase the

Mannlicher-Carcano, he then posed with it, and ultimately left it

behind in the sniper's nest, complete with fingerprints. This incon-

sistency further attests to Oswald's questionable mental state.

If anything can be conduded about Oswald it is that he was

indeed a lone nut, and most probably the assassin that the Warren

Commission, Posner, and other authors (Bain 1988, Moore 1990)

have concluded he was.

CONCLUSIONS

There are many other areas of inquiry that could have been covered

for this analysis. Certainly the autopsy of President Kennedy left

much to be desired, and left numerous unanswered questions.

Many book chapters have been penned alleging botched or even

faked autopsy (see Livingstone 1992, for a thorough discussion of

alleged forgery of autopsy photos and X-rays). Cyril Wecht (1993),

in his book on pathology and crime, still contends that the autopsy

is one of the worst cases of abuse of medical science that ever

existed.

As Posner recently said on the Today Show, the Kennedy family

itself was partly to blame for this situation, because they didn't want

the president's illness to become known. But a botched autopsy does

not a conspiracy make. Nor do any of the other countless incon-

gruities, inconsistencies, or fantastic concoctions imagined by those

with conspiratorial tendencies.

If anything, the conspiracy crowd has sought to complicate a sit-

uation which is really quite simple--almost too simple to be taken

at face value. Judging by the number of conspiracy theories sur-

rounding numerous domestic tragedies of late, it seems it has now

become an ingrained part of our culture to need to believe that

unseen powers are orchestrating the tragedies we see reported

on television. Oklahoma City...Waco...the World Trade Cen-

ter...TWA Flight 800...Lockerbie...Martin Luther King, Jr.....the

list goes on. And one more Kurt Cobain (of Nirvana angst and

acclaim) did not commit suicide...he was killed!

The JFK case, however, remains the Rosetta Stone of conspiracy

theories. A president who inspired widespread admiration was

snatched prematurely from a celebrity-worshiping American pub-

lic. The Camelot lifestyle of the young and attractive first couple had

48 SKEPTIC

captured the hearts of a citizenry suffering through the anxieties of

the Cold War. While it is admirable that our country should grieve

its fallen leader, the act of grieving alone does not prove a conspir-

acy existed-

The pro-conspiracy proposition suffers from a number of seri-

ous shortcomings. Foremost among them is that the burden of

proof is on those who allege a conspiracy to name the individuals

responsible for the conspiracy and to present their evidence for mak-

ing that charge. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff as TV's Judge

Wapner was wont to say. Instead, the C-buffs try to deflect attention

away from their lack of proof onto problems they detect with the

Warren Commission findings. But nitpicking through 23 volumes

in search of errors to be able to discredit the lone assassin theory is

no different from sifting through the 66 books of the Bible for his-

torical or spiritual inconsistencies so as to vilify Christians. While

there are errors in the Warren Commission report (and in the Bible,

for that matter), this alone does not signify conspiracy or cover-up.

A second problem with the pro-conspiracy position is that none

of the points they have made either singularly or collectively prove

a conspiracy. They raise interesting questions, and then leave the

reader to draw his own conclusions.

In addition, pro-conspiracy advocates have failed to produce

any of the mythical accomplices. Lee Harvey Oswald was the only

perpetrator caught, and in 35 years, no one else has been appre-

hended. It is easy to point fingers and imply that certain individuals

or groups "coulda/woulda" been a part of such a cons-piracy, but in

the absence of such a person or persons, their position crumbles.

These would be conspirators are like the mythical "Raoul" con-

cocted by James Earl Ray, in prison up until his death this year for

the murder of Martin Luther King, Jr. Ray, an uneducated con-man

with loads of jail experience even before the murder, dreamed up

this figure as his co-conspirator. Even the King family fell for Ray's

story, and contends that Ray was at most only partially guilty for

their patriarch's death. Posner (1998) handily debunks this "con-

spiracy" in his recent book on what is rapidly becoming the second-

most popular conspiracy theory in the U.S.

Another serious blow to the pro-conspiracy devotees is that

there is division in the camp. About the only thing they can agree on

is that they do not agree with the Warren Commission. After that,

everyone goes their separate ways with the disparate targets and

agendas. Scheim (1988) thinks the Mafia did it. Blakey and Billings

(1981) contend that the CIA was in on it. Zirbe] (1991) promotes

his "Texas Connection" hypothesis that Vice President Lyndon

Johnson was somehow involved (and had the hubris to pull off the

crime in his own state!). And Garrison (1988), his theories champi-

oned in film by Oliver Stone, felt that criminal elements in his own

New Orleans were responsible.

Making things even worse is the seemingly annual confession in

another book or sizzling tabloid tell-all by someone who claims to

either have been in Dealey Plaza that fateful day and can finger the

other person(s) involved, or who claims to have been Jack Ruby's

business associate (see Oliver 1994). Menninger (1992) goes so far

as to say that a Secret Service agent accidentally fired the third shot,

the one that actually killed Kennedy. Murder has even been elevated

to scientific status in Assassination Science (Fetzer 1998), and Russell

(1992), in an agonizingly long tome, spins a tale of a Soviet plot to

use an American agent named Nagell to kill Oswald in order to pre-

vent the Kennedy assassination. Aside from attempting to cash in on

what is arguably one of America's most lucrative cottage industries,

these tomes and treatises do nothing to further the cause of the pro-

conspiracists, but are typically published just in time to mark

another anniversary of the President's death with the same pre-

dictability of daffodils in Spring and candy at Halloween.

While disagreement between the followers does not itself

destroy the pro-conspiracy position ( if it did, most religions would

be down the drain, too), it is the collection of these inherent weak-

nesses that makes their allegations untenable. Their method has

been to systematically chip away at the Warren Commission, one

brick at a time. Yet the core conclusion of Warren Commission

report still stands—Oswald did it alone. ❑

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Belin, David 1988. Final Div-Insure. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Blakey, G. Robert and Richard N. Billings 1981. Fatal Hour. New York:

Berkley Books. Davis, John H. 1989. Mafia Kingfish. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company,

New York Fetzer, lames H. 1998. Assassination Science. Peru, IL Catfeet Press. Garrison, him 1988. On the Trail of the Assassins. New York Warner Books. Gmden, Robert I. and Harrison Livingstone 1989. High Treason. New

York: The Conservatory Press. Lane, Mark 1991. Rush to Judgment. New York: Thunder's Mouth Press. Litton, David 1980. Best Evidence. New York: Carroll and Graf Pub-

lishers. Livingstone, Harold 1992. High Treason 2. New York: Carroll and Graf

Publishers. Marrs, Jim 1989. Crossfire. New York Carroll and Graf Publishers.

.1997. Alien Agenda. New York Harper Collins Publishers. Menninger, Bonar 1992. Mortal Error. New York: St. Martin's Press. Moore, Jim 1990. Conspiracy of One. Fort Worth: The Summit Group.

Morrow, Robert D. 1992. First Hand Knowledge: Howl Participated in the CIA-Mafia Murder of President Kennedy. New York: S.P.I. Books.

North, Mark 1991. Act of Treason. New York: Carroll and Graf Pub- lishers.

Oliver, Beverly 1994. Nightmare in Dallas. Lancaster, PA: Starburst

Publishers. Posner, Gerald 1993. Killing the Dream. New York Random House.

. 1998. Case Closed. New York: Random House. Roberts, Craig 1994. Kill Zone. Tulsa, OK: Typhoon Press. Russell, Dick 1992. The Man Who Knew Too Much. New York: Carroll and

Graf Publishers. Scheim, David E. 1988. Contract on America. New York Zebra Books. Summers, Anthony 1980. Conspiracy. New York Paragon House. Weberman. Alan J, and Michael Canfield 1975. Coup D'Etat in America.

San Francisco: Quick American Archives. Wecht, Cyril 1993. Cause of Death. New York: Penguin Books. zirbel, Craig I. 1991. The Texas Connection: The Assassination of Pres-

ident Kennedy. Scottsdale, AZ: Wright and Company Publishers.

V01.6, No.4. 2998 49

SELECTIVE CITING OF WITNESSES BY POSNER-FROM THE SNYDER ARTICLE

Witnesses cited by Posner as evidence of an early first shot:

• Royce Skelton on the bridge over the Triple Underpass) • Barbara and Arnold Rowland (in front of the new Dallas Co. Criminal Courts Building) • Buell Wesley Frazier (on the steps in front of the Texas School Book Depository)

Witnesses pointing to a later first shot not cited by Posner: • Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman–right after we passed the Stemmons sign (riding shotgun in the President's limousine) • Mrs. Billie Clay—a few seconds after the car passed (10 ft. in front of the Stemmons sign) • Mayor Earle Cabell—just as we turned the corner (riding 5 cars back in the motorcade) • Chism—just in front of me (right in front of the sign) • Governor Connally-150-200 ft. after the turn (in jump seat in front of President and Mrs. Kennedy)

6th floor "sniper's nest"

Ca Also filmed fetal shot

I x

Gal-Tex 6ulkiing

E w

Live oak block rig Sniper's view of motercecle

Pallas County Grimm Courts 8uidlix3 fro.)

R.owlerlde

Dallas County ..nmin I i...cunt.E. buildrng (ckl)

E 8

Dallas County Kean:Is 6ullchno

Houston

Frazier

(Nix X

100 \--posner's first shot 7.490- 212 Snyder's first shot

(Z. 212 Warren Commission's first shot

Kennedy reacts to shot "13abeschke Lady"

Moorman 8 Hill

•fittal shot

Ambush en. used by X Files "GigareZte Man' &teem swear with

manhole GOVer

+.4 Lip

P 2O Ki 60 CO ■1■.■1■■■■.■1■1,..0■■

E

j'""".:r""bilzunclaci by Piece ,Skelton • of eldewalk chipped

triple

,

e

InCAS1 fo

at y 2

nd) ed shat

3

parking lot DEALEY PLAZA DALLAS, TEXAS

November 22.1963 12:30 pm CST

THIS MAP CONTAINS ITEMS MENTIONED IN BOTH THE GERLICH ARTICLE PRECEDING IT

AND THE SNYDER ARTICLE THAT FOLLOWS.

50 SKEPTIC

CASE STILL OPEN Skepticism and the Assassination of JFK

By Arthur and Margaret Snyder

ON NovEmBER 22,1963, Pittstnerr JOHN F. KENNEDY

was acsassinated in Dallas, Texas. The FBI investi-gation of the assassination was bungled. The

autopsy was bungled. The Warren Commission appointed by President Johnson to investigate the

murder was misdirected by the FBI, which reported to the Com-

mission only evidence supporting Director Hoover's preconceived

theory of the case. Warren Commission staff systematically selected

witnesses that supported the comfortable lone assassin theory. As a

result, the 1964 Warren Report was bungled.

The Warren Commission concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald,

acting alone, killed the President. Gerald Posner, in his 1993 book Case Closed, vigorously defends the Commission's conclusion and attempts to discredit Commission critics. Although he admits the

Warren Commission's investigation was flawed (see his chapter 17),

he contends that it came to the correct conclusion.

Some skeptics take Posner seriously. Nick Gerlich (1997) char-acterizes Caw Closed as the "definitive Oswald-did-it book," and

SIEvnc editor Michael Sherrner (1997) in his article "The Belief

Module" writes, "...the evidence, as presented by Gerald Posner in his 1993 book Case Closed, supports the theory that Oswald did the

job all by hirnserThe mainstream media were also impressed. The cover of The U.S. News and World Report special issue with excerpts

from Case Closed reads: "After 30 years of conspiracy theories, a bril-

liant new book finally proves who killed Kennedy" (1993). Case Closed is convincing. The evidence as presented fits the

theory, contrary evidence is debunked, and critics are made to look like fools or charlatans. However, a critical reading shows that the

evidence has been cut-to-fit. The case is far from dosed.

The primary thrust of this article will be to examine the evi-dence as presented in Case Closed and to demonstrate that it is incomplete, distorted, and theory-driven. We will not propound a theory of the case, but it will become evident that the lone assassin

scenario suffers from serious inconsistencies. However, before beginning this daunting task, we pause to examine the attitude skeptics should take toward conspiracy theories.

SKEPTICISM VS. CONSPIRACY THEORIES?

Recent articles in SKEPTIC and Skeptical Inquirer (e.g., Lier, 1996; Henry, 1995; Gerlich, 1997; Shermer, 1997) appear to lump the

possibility of a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination with

UFOs, dowsing, clairvoyance, and other extraordinary claims. Conspiracy "buffs" are portrayed as "nuts" or "true believers." Yet

there is nothing extraordinary about conspiracies, many examples

of which make it dear they can and do happen:

• John Wilkes Booth led a conspiracy that killed Abraham

Lincoln, and attempted to lull Secretary of State Seward and Vice

Pi nident Andrew Johnson. There is considerable evidence that

Booth was an agent of the Confederate government, although he

was acting without authorization in choosing to kill President

Lincoln rather than kidnap him (Gaddy, 1997).

• The Dreyfus affair was a conspiracy by high ranking French

army officers to frame Alfred Dreyfus for treason actually com-

mitted by Count Esterhazy (Snyder, 1973). While not an assassi-

nation, it shows how a widespread and enduring conspiracy can

function without centrally directed planning.

• In 1950 Puerto Rican nationalists attempted to kill Harry Tru-

man and succeeded in bombing the Capitol (Smith, 1998).

• Eight attempts were made on the life of Charles de Gaulle. The

conspiracy by L'Organisation Aimee Secret (OAS) involved ele-

ments of the French military services that opposed Algerian

independence (Sifakis, 1991).

The CIA was involved in the overthrow and the resulting mur-

der of Chilean President Salvador Allende (Hersh, 1983, 264-

296). They aided the French dissidents attempting to kill De

Gaulle. The CIA conspired with the Mafia in numerous failed

attempts to kill Castro (Church, 1976; Conover, 1997). A CIA hit

on Dominican President Trujillo succeeded, but Congolese

President Lumumba was killed by political enemies before CIA-

sponsored assassins could get to him (Vankin, 1995, 1I-15). See

Wiliam Blum's 1986 book The CIA: A Forgotten History for

details of these and other CIA plots.

Both conspiracies and "lone nuts" are common in the history of

political assassinations. Leon C7nlgosz killed McKinley Charles Guiteau killed Garfield. They acted alone with at most imagined

support. The only way to tell conspiracies from the actions of such

"lone nuts" is to look at the evidence in each case.

Perhaps skeptics regard it as irrational to mistrust our Govern-

ment's official conclusions. The Warren Commission "looked" at

the evidence and concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone

killed President Kennedy. Could it be they were not telling the truth?

Or that they might not have been told the truth?

Vol. 6. No.4.1998 51

Government lying is not extraordinary. Ours has lied on

numerous well-documented occasions, including the U2 incident,

the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the secret inva-

sions of Cambodia and Laos, Watergate, and Iran-Contra. The FBI

in "the most exhaustive investigation since the as ssination of JFK"

concluded that the Nixon White House was innocent of Watergate

wrongdoing (Emery, 1994,217). Government deception is common. It has happened through-

out history, and it occurred in the JFK assassination investigation. Within hours of Oswald's arrest, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover

decided that Oswald alone committed the crime (HSCA Report,

128 and 244). The FBI rank-and-file proved eager to demonstrate

that their prescient boss was fight, FBI Agent James Hosty, who had

received a note allegedly from Oswald 10 days before the aameeina-

don, destroyed it following orders from the Dallas Special Agent in

Charge Gordon Shanklin. Hosty characterize it as an "angry note

telling me to knock it off and stop harassing his [Oswald's] wife" (Hosty, 1996, 27). Nannie Lee Fenner, the receptionist who accepted

the note and later identified Oswald as the man who brought it in,

claimed it said "Let this be a warning 3 will blow up the FBI or the

Dallas police if you do not stop bothering my wife" (HSCA, VoL 11,

278). Whatever its content, its existence was withheld from the War-

ren Commission, and Hosty's name, address, and phone number

were omitted from the list prepared for the Commission from

Oswald's address book (Hurt, 1985). Another example can be seen in two FBI memos dated Novem-

ber 30, 1963, reporting on the FBI laboratory's analysis of the paper bag that allegedly hid Oswald's rifle as he brought it into the book

depository-. one given to the Commission and cited in their report links it to paper Oswald had access to at the depository; the other,

which surfaced 16 years later, in nearly identical wording, denies

there was a link (Hurt, 1985, 251). FBI agents pressured Nelson Del-

gado (a Marine comrade of Oswald's) and many others to change their stones to support Hoover's theory (Warren, Vol. VIII, 228).

The following exchange from dedassified minutes of a Com-mission meeting (North, 1991, 515) illustrates that the Commission was not oblivious to the problem:

McCoy: ...the time has come—is almost overdue—for us to have a bet-

ter perspective of the FBI investigation than we now have.... We are so

dependent on them for our facts....

Rankin: Part of our difficulty in regard to it is that they have no problem.

They have decided that no one else is involved...

Russell: They have tried the case and reached a verdict on every aspect. Boggs: You have put your finger on it.

The Warren Report made no mention of these difficulties.

Instead it proclaimed: "Because of the diligence, cooperation,

and facilities of Federal investigative agencies, it was unneces-

sary for the Commission to employ investigators other than the members of the Commission's legal staff."

Should conspiracy be rejected simply because a lone assassin

provides a simpler explanation? We refer to this argument as Ritual

Doom's Razor Abuse: Occam's razor is elevated to an absolute pref-

erence for simplicity, a rule of"reasoning"—"of two theories choose

the simplest"—(Henry, 1994), instead of the rule of thumb "Enti-

ties should not be multiplied more than necessary" (Occam, 1300).

If there is evidence for them, multiplying entities may be necessary.

If history is to be a science (Sherrner, 1996), a conspiracy theory needs to be judged on the same basis as any other theory. Is it testable? Does it explain anything in a concrete, meaningful way?

On this basis some theories can be rejected out of hand; for exam-

ple, the numerological fantasies of Rev, Farrakhan (Brackman,

1996). More rational theories need to be investigated They should

be judged on the evidence.

Case Closed is considered to be the definitive work on the JFK

assassination by both skeptics and the mainstream media. But the

distortions and blunders in Case Closed are numerous and have

been documented by a number of authors. See, for example, Harold

Weisberg's 1994 book Casr Open, as well as articles by Gary

Aguilar, Martin Shackelford, Peter Dale Scott, Milicent Cranor,

Jerry Rose, James Folliard, M. M. Dworetsky, Barb Junkkarinen,

Wallace Milani and David Starks published in various journals

(see the bibliography, but most can be found on the Web from

http://home.cynetnet/jfic/issuel.htm). For this article we have

relied on the above works as well as the advice, observations and

ideas of Gary Aguilar, Milicent Cranor, Paul Hoch, Joe Riley,

Martin Shackelford and Stuart Wexler. To demonstrate that Case

Closed fails to dose the case we will dissect a few critical examples

of Posner's approach to the evidence.

THE HEAD SNAP

The head snap refers to the backward motion of President

Kennedy's head seen in the Zapruder film. As Posner puts'it: "But if

the President was struck in the head by a bullet fired from the rear,

then why does he jerk so violently backward on the Zapruder film which recorded the assassination? To most people, the rapid back-

ward movement at the moment of the shot means the President

was struck from the front" Posner begins by trying to dismiss the significance of the head snap with a quote from respected forensic

pathologist Dr. Michael Baden: "People have no conception of how

real life works with bullet wounds. It's not like Hollywood, where

someone gets shot and falls over backwards." Dr. Baden is right

about people, but heads are more than an order of magnitude

lighter than a person. The velocity imparted to a head by a stopping bullet is given by conservation of momentum:

vhead bullet (Ad buliet / M head)

where V is velocity and M is mass. For a 10 gm bullet moving

at 550 meter/sec hitting a 5 Kg head this is –1 meter/sec; or

52 SKEPTIC

FIGURE la Frames Z311-Z314, closeup The fatal shot sequence. There appears to be a forward movement of Kennedy's head between frames Z312 and 2313 as measured by the patch of chrome behind his head which appears to increase in length in from frame 2312 to 2313.

FIGURE lb Frames Z312-Z313 (below) A wider view of the same fatal shot sequence. While the the increase in size of the patch of chrome in frame Z313 creates the appearance 01 a forward move-ment of Kennedy's head between Z312 and 2313, the increase is an artifact of blurring. Compare the highlights on other places on the car and you will sea that they too have "grown" due to blurring by the same amount as the bright patch that has been used to measure the position of Kennedy's head. The actual forward movement must be measured by comparnng Z312 to Z314, rattler than the blurry 2313.

to put it another way –2.4 inches per Zapruder frame.

Having used Dr. Baden to dismiss the possibility that a bullet

strike could cause head motion, Posner twists around and in the

next paragraph notes that ltek Corporation, using a "computer

erthancernent"(Itek, 1975), discovered that JFK "first jerked forward

23 inches before starting his rapid movement backward!' Itek did not "discover" this forward motion. Caltech physicist Richard

Feynman noticed it in 1966 when David Lifton showed him the

7apruder frames published in Life (Lifton, 1980, 48). Warren critic

Josiah Thompson published measurements made on black and

white copies in his 1967 book Six Seconds in Dallas (Thompson, 1967, 90).

The measurements of Itek and Thompson are almost inconsis-

tent with a shot from a Manrilicher-Carcano. The motion is so large that nearly all the momentum of the bullet is needed to account for

it. However, quantitatively Thompson and Itek were mistaken. The apparent motion between Zapruder frames 2312 and 7313 (see FIGURE la, frames 311-314) is an artifact of the blurring of frame 2313 (Snyder, 1997). This is not to say that JFK'S head did not move

forward between frames 2312 and 2313, but that the 2313 blur

obscures the motion so that it cannot be measured using these

frames. The actual forward motion (-0.3 meter/sec) can be

estimated by comparing 7.312 to 2314. It is about 113 the value

obtained using the Itek or Thompson measurements—consistent

with a Carcano bullet imparting –1/3 its momentum and –1/2 its

energy. What is the purpose of Posner's dance around the forward

motion? He torts out Dr. Baden to deny that the direction of motion tells us anything, then uses the observed forward motion to verify a

shot from the rear. None of this explains why the head went back-

wards –100 msec later.

An explanation for the backward motion was proposed by

Nobel laureate) iris Alvarez, in his 1976 article in the American Jour-

nal of Physics. Posner's description of Alvarez's work is ludicrous:

"Dubbed the 'jet effect, Alvarez established it both through physical experiments that recreated the head shot and extensive laboratory

calculations. He found that when the brain and blood tissue exploded out of JFK's head, they carried more momentum than was

brought in by the bullet. That caused the head to be thrust back-

ward—in an opposite direction—as a rocket does when its jet fuel

is ejected_

Vol.6, No.4. 1998 53

The "recreation" of the head shot consisted of shooting 2-3 pound melons wrapped in strapping tape with the wrong gun (30.06) and the wrong ammunition (hunting instead of jacketed military ammunition). The "extensive laboratory calculations" con-sisted of a "back of the envelope" calculation Alvarez did in his hotel room at the 1969 meeting of the American Physical Society in St. Louis (Alvarez, 1976, 819). The calculation demonstrates that the jet-effect is kinematically allowed. It does not establish that ejected material "carried more momentum than was brought in by the bul-let," but only that this is possible.

The possibility of the jet-effect arises from the relationship

between kinetic energy and momentum:

p_,2

Where P is momentum, M is mass and E is kinetic energy. If a

large enough mass is ejected it can carry more momentum than the incoming bullet deposits using only a fraction of the bullet's energy. For example if 0.2 Kg of material were expelled carrying 10% of the bullet's energy it would carry 7.8 Kg-m/sec of momentum—enough to overcome the maximum possible momentum a Carcano bullet can deposit (6 Kg-rn/sec). Kinematics allows jet-effect to occur but only the detailed interaction of the bullet with the target determines if it actually occurs under a given set of circumstances.

Alvarez's melon shooting experiment demonstrated that there are circumstances under which the jet-effect occurs. Dr. LK. Lattimer (1980) did experiments using the correct rifle and ammu-nition. Lattimer claimed his targets—whether skulls or melons—"always" went backwards. Edgewood Arsenal did experiments on skulls (Edgewood, 1964: HSCA, Vol. 1, 404). All skulls shot by Edgewood moved away from the shooter.

Posner makes the situation with regard to the jet-effect seem neat, straightforward, and scientifically well established when it actually is messy and confused.

Since the publication of Case Closed there have been new experiments by Dr. Doug DeSalles and Dick Hobbs (DeSalles and Hobbs, 1994) and by us (Snyder, 1996). DeSalles and Hobbs shot tape-wrapped melons using a Carcano rifle and jacketed ammuni-tion. In 11 shots they saw no jet-effect. ln 1996 we undertook to resolve the apparent discrepancy. We shot a variety of melons with two different guns (30.06 and Carcano) and both jacketed and soft-nosed hunting ammunition. The results were surprisingly simple: Hunting bullets produced a jet-effect Jacketed bullets did not produce a jet-effect

This confirms Alvarez's results using hunting ammunition. Lai-timer's results on melons appear to be inconsistent with our exper-iments and those of DeSalles and Hobbs.

From these results one might conclude that the jet-effect can-

not explain the head snap. However, a melon is not a head. In our next experiment we will attempt to ascertain if the presence of a hard skull-like material around the target melon can cause a

jacketed bullet to fragment and act like a hunting bullet. At this point in time the jet-effect issue is not resolved. In his

explanation of the head snap Posner employs, in addition to the jet-effect, a so-called "neuromuscular spasm." His full explanation might be described ac jet-assisted neuromuscular spasm. Posner writes, "First, when the bullet destroyed the President's cortex, it caused a neuromuscular spasm, which sent a massive discharge of

neurologic impulses from the injured brain down the spine to every muscle in the body"

The authority for this statement is the House Special Commit-tee on Assassinations forensic pathology panel. The HSCA is not as definite as Posner: "The panel further recognizes the possibility of the body stiffening, with an upward and backward lunge, which

might have resulted from a massive downward rush of neurologic stimuli to all efferent nerves" (HSCA, 1974, 174-175).

The HSCA also suggested that "decerebrate rigidity" or DR as described by Sherrington (1898) "could contribute to the Presi-

dent's backward motion." No practicing neurologist or neurosci-entist testified that DR or a "massive downward rush of neurologic stimuli" could explain the head snap. DR is due to the absence of nerve signals that keep opposed muscles in equilibrium rather than "a massive discharge of neurologic impulses." Since JFK is posi-tioned facing to the left at the moment of the fatal shot, any "upward and backward lunge" whatever its cause would have pushed JFK to the right, not the left.

The HSCA also noticed that "such decerebrate rigidity as Sherrington described usually does not commence for several minutes after separation of the upper brain centers from the brain stem and spinal cord," but included DR in their stew of pos-sibilities anyway (HSCA, Vol. 7, 174). Again Posner has it wrong. Again he portrays a confusing and difficult subject as if it was simple and well understood.

The other obvious explanation for the backward motion of JFK's head—a shot from the front—is problematic too. A shot from the grassy knoll should have left an exit wound in the left rear. There was none. A frangible bullet that stopped without exiting either should have deposited more fragments than are visible in the extant X-rays or it would have had to have been made of an exotic mater-ial such as glycerin ice (McCarthy, 1992), However, fragments could have been expelled during the assassination or removed before the

X-rays were taken. A shot that skipped along the right edge of JFK's head has to come from a very forward position, but might have deflected to JFK's right, accounting for the leftward movement starting in Z3I5. This would, however, conflict with the majority of witnesses, who placed a shot on the grassy knoll (Thompson, 1967,

244). While none of the proposed scenarios are satisfactory, a frontal shot cannot he ruled out either. At this point, it is no more implau-sible than neuromuscular spasm. The jet-effect may soon he ruled out. Case Closed presents oversimplified explanations of the head snap that are just plain wrong.

SKEPTIC

THE FIRST SHOT

The timing of the first shot and whether it hit or missed has long

been a matter of controversy. The Warren Commission placed it –6

seconds before the fatal head shot. Posner moves it two seconds ear-

lier thereby giving Oswald more time to fire three shots. Even in the 8 seconds Posner provides, firing three shots, re-acquiring the target

and aiming twice through the limited field-of-view (18°) of the

misaligned 4x scope would not have been easy. The scope was so

badly aligned that shims had to be put in to make testing possible

(Warren, Vol. 3, 443). Thus, it is not a question of the scope just

being knocked out of whack by post-assassination handling. It is

more reasonable to suppose Oswald used the iron sights, but even

this would not have been easy for someone with Oswald's modest attainments as a marksman. Only highly skilled marksmen in test

situations have been able to accomplish this feat in the Warren Commission's six seconds.

Posner selects ear-witnesses who suggest a shot near frame

Z160. He paraphrases them, one after another, describing how the

first shot occurred "just" after the limousine turned the corner onto

Elm. Other witnesses place the shot later. Posner does not mention

them.

Among his just-after-the-tom witnesses, Posner contrives to

make their testimony seem more definite than it was. Two of his

selected witnesses were not very dose. Royce Skelton was way down

by the triple underpass at the far end of Dealey Plaza (see the map

on page 50). Barbara Rowland was with her husband near the cor-

ner of Houston and Main. Mr. Rowland testified before the Warren Commission as follows: "The then the [sic] motorcade turned on

Elm and was obscured from our vision by the crowd, and we were

discussing Mrs. Kennedy's clothes at that time. My wife likes

clothes." Mrs. Rowland said "...as they turned the corner I heard a

shot...." She was not in a good location to see how far down Elm the

car had progressed.

Posner's other selected witnesses are in reasonable locations to determine the time of the shot. For example, Wesley Frazier was on the steps of the School Book Depository building. He recalled,

"Well, I say, just right after he went by he hadn't hardly got by, I heard a sound and if you have ever been around motorcycles you

know how they backfire, and so I thought one of them motorcycles

backfired because right before his car came down, now there were

several of these motorcycle policemen, and they took off down

toward the underpass down there...." This supports Posner's thesis

of an early shot even though Frazier thought the sound came from down the street instead of the 6th floor window directly overhead.

Here are a few witnesses Posner fails to call:

Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman, who was riding shotgun in the front seat of JFK's limousine: "As we turned off Houston onto

Elm and made the short little dip to the left going down grade, as 1 said, we were away from the buildings, and were—there was a sign

on one side of the road which I don't recall what it was or what it

said, but we no more than passed that and you are out in the open,

and there is a report like a firecracker, pop." Mrs. Billie P. Clay, who was standing about 10 feet up the street

from the Stemmons Freeway sign, which obscures JFK in the

Zapruder film from frames Z200 to 77,4: "Just a few seconds after

the car in which President John F. Kennedy was riding passed the

location where I was standing, I heard a shot"

John Chisrn, who was was standing immediately in front of the

Sternmons freeway sign: "And just as he got just about in front of

me, he turned and waved at the crowd on this side of the street, the

right side; at this point I heard what sounded like one shot."

Dallas Mayor Earle Cabell was five cars back from the presiden-

tial limousine. As his car turned the corner, the presidential car was

approaching the Stemmons sign: "We were just rounding the

corner of Market [sic] and Elm, making the left turn, when the first

shot rang out."

Thompson, in Six Seconds in Dallas, cites the testimony of 12

witnesses (a few of which we have reproduced above) that point to

the first shot occurring as the car approaches the Stemmons sign (Thompson, 1967, 32). Posner mentions only one of the 12—Texas

Governor John Connally. Connally's testimony is distorted by leav-

ing out his estimate of the distance they had traveled down Elm

(150 to 200 feet) when he heard the first shot. Witnesses do sometimes contradict each other. Posner selects

witnesses and trims their testimony to support his version of events.

The keystone of Posner's time shift is the behavior of Rosemary

Willis in Z160-Z190. He describes Rosemary's run as follows:

New Zapruder enhancements, however, confirm the ear-witness testi-

mony that an early shot missed the President and the Governor. Begin-

ning in frame 160, a young girl in a red skin and white top who was

running along the left side of the President's car, began turning to her

right By frame 197 less than 1.5 seconds later, the enhancement dearly

shows she had stopped, twisted completely away from the motorcade,

and was staring back at the School Book Depository.

You do not need "new Zapruder enhancements" to see

Rosemary running, stopping and turning. Posner uses the so-

called "new Zapruder enhancements" of Dr. Michael West. Mar-tin Shackelford (1998) notes that West's "enhancements" are

only simple enlargements with circles for emphasis made for Dr.

West by news photographer Johann Rush. They are not "com-

puter enhancements" as stated on page 317 of Case Closed. David

Loi, at the time a 15-year-old high school student, spotted Rose-mary in a bootleg copy of the Zapruder film in 1979. You do not

need "enhancements" to see that she did not begin to slow and turn in at Z160. She continued running and glancing at the Pres-

ident's limousine until about Z180. By 2187 she was looking

back in the direction of the School Book Depository. Her father,

Phil Willis, was also standing back there. Nobody else in the

VoL 6, No.4,1998

55

•NI I

stuvreb •

■•••.-

44. 159 ; 1581

FIGURE 2— Frames Z317-Z318 A Comparison of these two frames shows the rapid angular acceleration of the camera as Zapruder reacts to the Z313 shot_

317

•

318

FIGURE 3—

Frames Z158-Z159 Are these jiggles an indication of an "early shot"?

FIGURE 4— Frames Z223-Z224 The lapel flip—an indica-tion that Connally has just been wounded, or lust the wind?

crowd turns to look back at Willis or the Book Depository. Posner notes that when Rosemary was asked "why she had

stopped running with the President's car, she said 'I stopped when I heard the shot.' " The question was asked by David Lui for his arti-cle "The Little Girl Must have Heard" which was syndicated by the Los Angeles Times (Weisberg, 1994, 25-30). It would not have made a very interesting story if all the little girl had heard was her father yelling at her to stop. Posner grants that, "Some believe the girl's reaction was because her father, Phil Willis, standing only 10 feet away told her to stop and come back to him." In a footnote he acknowledges that Willis himself is one of the "some" who believe he called out for her to stop. He trots out the "enhanced Zapruder film" to debunk Willis, claiming that Willis was taking pictures when Rosemary turned. In fact, as is easily seen in any half reason-able copy of the film, Willis does not have the camera "in front of his face" for the entire Z160-Z190 interval. At about Z187 he is raising it to his eye again, but if Rosemary was responding to his command rather than a shot, he would have had to yell out well before Z187.

The picture Willis was about to take is very interesting. Willis tes-tified to the Warren Commission in 1964 that "the shot caused me to squeeze the camera shutter, and I got a picture as the President was hit with the first shot." Analysis undertaken for the HSCA (HSCA, 1979, Vol. 15, 695-697) later determined that this picture was taken at Zapruder frame 202. This contradicts Rosemary's state-ment to David Lui 16 years later. It places the first shot during the period when the view of the President from the sixth floor "sniper's nest" was obscured (though not completely) by a Texas live oak.

Posner uses "jiggle analysis" proposed by Luis Alvarez in the same paper where he develops the idea of the jet-effect (Alvarez, 1976) to provide "additional evidence of the moment of the first shot." Jiggle analysis seeks to identify times when shots could have occurred by looking for frames where the Zapruder film is blurred either because he was startled by a shot or because the shock wave produced by a bullet directly affected the camera_ Posner recognizes "a jiggle...could be caused by many other factors"

Blurs are common. There are a large number in frames

56 SKEPTIC

frame Z223 and 2224 (Flaw 4), noted by Jeff Lotz of Failure

Analysis in his computer enhancement, to establish the time of the

SBT shot. A computer enhancement is not needed to see the lapel

flip. It could just have been caused by the wind,

which had nearly blown off Jackie Kennedy's

hat a few minutes earlier, but Posner writes:

"...this jacket movement may be one of the

most important timing confirmations in the

case, as it establishes the moment when the bullet hit him. The movement of the jacket

took place at the exact area where the Gover-

nor's suit and shirt have a bullet hole, as the

missile passed through his right shoulder blade

and out under his right nipple." FIGURE 5 shows

a drawing of Connally's suit back-lighted to

show the bullet hole (Groden, 1997). The hole

is nowhere near the lapel.

Posner attempts to strengthen his case for a

Z224 shot using what is one of the strongest

pieces of evidence that Governor Connally's

wrist was not hit then: "A film enhancement,

Z I -ZI 32 (before the President's limousine appears) that nobody

attributes to shots. Posner says: "The largest spastic movement by

Zapruder came at frames Z313-Z314, the moment of the head

shot." Z313 is blurry but far from the blurriest

frame in the film. To attribute the blurring of

Z313 to a spastic response by Zapruder is

absurd. He could not have responded so fast.

Alvarez attributed the blurring of Z.313 to the

shock wave produced by the bullet which would have hit Zapruder's camera at almost

the same time the bullet hit JFK. Alvarez inter-

preted the very blurry frames Z318-319 (FIG-

URE 2) as Zapruder flinching in response to the

shot and used them to calibrate Zapruder's

response time at about 5 frames. Z158 and

Z159 are also very blurry. Like 2318, Z158

shows a large increase in the blurring com-

pared to the previous frame indicating a rapid

acceleration of the camera. Z158-159 {FIGURE FIOUPIE 5: Governor Connally's coat. An

3) are consistent with an early shot at about arrow points to the location of the back-lit

Z153, but they are not positive evidence of bullet hole.

such a shot. It might just have been a random jiggle. There are also jiggles consistent with the time implied by Phil Willis' picture and

testimony.

Posner selects his witnesses and distorts what they said. Two

were too far away to be able to make a reliable estimate. He ignores

witnesses that do not support his thesis. At best, jiggle analysis is

consistent with an early shot. Other than Rosemary Willis there is

no response from the crowd or security personnel. Critically exam-ined, Posner's case for an early shot is unconvincing.

THE SINGLE BULLET THEORY

The single bullet theory (SBT) refers to the hypothesis that a single

bullet caused JFK's back and neck wounds and all of Governor

Connally's five wounds. Without the SBT Oswald could not have fired all the shots.

Posner does not follow the Warren Commission's version of the SI3T, which is untenable and was not accepted by three of the com-

missioners. Instead he appropriates the version developed by Robert

Piziali and the team of experts he led for the prosecution at the

American Bar Association mock trial of Oswald at their 1992 con-

vention in San Francisco. Dr. Piziali and his team were supplied to

the ABA by Failure Analysis Associates (FAA), a company that spe-

cializes in the application of technical expertise to legal problems,

Posner fails to mention that FAA also supplied experts (led by CEO Roger McCarthy) for the defense side (McCarthy, 19951. Nor does he let his readers know that the jury, which heard both sides, could not agree on a verdict.

Posner uses the motion of Governor Connally's lapel between

done by Dr. Michael West, shows the Governor's light-colored Stet-

son hat, which he was holding in his right hand, near his chest start

to rise. It flipped quickly up during frames 2227 and 2228 and then

at 2229 it started coming rapidly down, and by the next frame it was

at its original position:

Dr. West, a forensic dentist not a neurologist, is said to have

called this "positive proof" of "a neurological reaction to physical trauma." Connally was not hit in the nervous system. Dr. West is one

of Posner's favorite authorities, but he is not highly respected in the

forensic science community. Mark Hansen (1996, 50), in an article

that appeared in the AM Journal notes: "The American Academy of

Forensic Sciences ethics committee recommended that West be

expelled for allegedly failing to meet professional standards of

research, misrepresenting data to support a general acceptance of

his techniques, and offering opinions that exceed a reasonable degree of scientific certainty" West was suspended in 1994 by the

American Board of Forensic Odontology because he "had misrep-resented evidence and testified outside his field of expertise." Dr.

Charles Gregory, who operated on the wrist, testified (Warren, Vol. 4, 124), "[the) dorsal branch of the radial nerve, a sensory nerve in

this immediate vicinity was partially transected together with one

tendon leading to the thumb,which was totally transected." The rest

of Connally visible in the film is unperturbed.

That Connally could have held onto his hat as his wrist was

shattered and a tendon controlling the thumb was severed is not

credible. The impact alone would have been enough to make him

drop the hat. Under Posner's scenario, a lOg bullet lost 500 feet per second passing through the Governor's wrist (Posner, 478), This

impact would have sent his wrist and hand flying at a velocity of —5

V01.6. Ni,4. 1998 57

FIGURE 6: Drawing of Dr. Thorbum's

patient from the 1887 paper.

2,17

275

•

feet per second—downward and to the right, rotating around his

elbow. It would not have caused his hat to flip up. The hat would

have been ripped from his hand.

In a footnote Posner again rails on Dr. Baden to say,"If he does-

n't drop the hat, it doesn't mean a thing" and that it is a"moot point"

since "...the Zapruder film never shows him dropping the hat."

Note how artfully Posner words the latter quote (his paraphrase of

Baden). True, the film "never shows him dropping the hat; but he

was out of sight behind the Stemmons sign before frame 2223 and

his hand and hat disappeared from view as Zapruder fails to track

the limousine's downward motion between frames Z280 and 1310.

Even with a severed tendon the Governor might have been able

to hold his hat or even pick it up, but he could not have held onto it

under the impact of the bullet. If his wrist had been hit while it was

in sight we would be able to see its motion (-3 inches per frame).

The film never shows him dropping his hat or his wrist flying off.

The wrist must have been hit off camera.

Posner, despite his faith in jiggle analysis in his brief for an early

first shot, does not mention it in his SBT discussion. Perhaps this is

because there is no jiggle to confirm his shot at Z224. 1227 and

Z229 are somewhat blurred but nothing like the major reaction to

the head shot in frame Z318.

It seems apparent to us that IFK was already reacting to a hit in

Z225. This would have been impossible if he had just been hit at

Z224, but since he is hidden by the Stemmons sign before Z225, it

is not possible to be sure he is reacting. His posture seems odd and

his arms and shoulders are starting to take on the splayed out posi-

tion with his fist rising to his neck that is fully formed a few frames

later. By 1226 he is dearly reacting.

Posner deals with IFK's rapid reaction by elevating the "Thor-

burn position"—promoted by urologist I.K. Lattimer as the reason

JFK raised his fist in front of his face—to the status of a "neurolog-

ical reflex" (Lattimer, 1980). Posner writes, "A spinal injury at the

level of C-6 [sixth cervical vertebrae] is significant because it can

cause an instantaneous reaction called Thorburn's position:" Pos-

ner does not reference Thorbum directly but relies on Lattimer.

Milicent Cranor has read Thorbum's original 1887 paper (Cranor,

1998; Thorburn,1887). Dr. Thorburn did not see his patient until

four days after the accident that injured his spine at C6. The patient's

arms had already taken the awkward position shown in FIGURE 6,

since called the Thorburn position. It is a specific indicator of darn-

age at C6. Compare the position of JFK's arms in 1247 (FIGURE 7)

with the position of Dr. Thorburn's patient. IFK's arms were not in

Thorburn position.

Posner attempts—again—to use West's "enhanced" Zapruder

film to support his muddled scenario:

Moreover, once C-6 is damaged, the arms would have remained locked

in the raised position indefinitely... In the nearly five seconds that

elapsed between the neck and the head wound, Mrs. Kennedy leaned

over toward him to see what had happened. At one point, she grabbed

his raised left arm with her right hand and tried to push it down. It

stayed up. Then she reached with both hands and tried again to push it

down, but the film dearly records his resistance. His arm did not lower.

That Mrs. Kennedy touched IFK's left arm during this period of

time is dear on the Zapruder film. For example see 2297 in FIGURE

7. In motion it looks like she might be pushing. No "enhancement"

is needed_ A few frames later she reached over with her left arm and

touched his left arm from below (1256-not shown). If anything it

looks like she might be pulling it. While his left arm remains up, his

right arm comes down. Mrs. Kennedy is not pushing on his right

arm. It is not "locked in the raised position indefinitely" (Z256

again). If Mrs. Kennedy is pushing or pulling on his left arm she suc-

ceeds in lowering it. By Z-275 both of JFK's arms are no longer

locked" in so called "Thorbum position;

While "computer enhancements" are not needed to see what's

going on in the Zapruder film, color and motion help. Some of the

FIGURE 7— Frame Z247— JFK reacts 10 the first shot and Mrs.

Kennedy reaches across to touch his left arm.

Frame 2-275—Both arms are no longer "locked" in the so-called 'Thor-bum position.'

58 SKEPTIC

FIGURE 8: One 6 Iwo Su ry !no autopsy photos of the back wound.

effects described are hard to see on the black and white stills avail-

able with this article. Also, Rosemary's run, Mrs. Kennedy "pushing" on JFK's arm, and the fate of Connally's hat are difficult to follow in

stills and, in any case, far more frames would be needed than can be

reproduced here. The new videotape and DVD from MPI Home

Video provide excellent color versions, but the old CD-ROM from

Macmillan Digital is good enough.

To explain the delay in Governor Connally's response compared

to IFICs, Posner uses Dr. Charles Gregory. Gregory is the only expert

he has to explain this remarkably long delay. Let us line-by-line deconstruct Posner's treatment of this issue (Posner, 1993, 331). Posner begins: At frames Z235-

Z236, Connally's mouth opened

wide, and by frame 2238 his cheeks puffed out and he turned sharply

down and to the right." This is an

accurate description of what hap-

pens to Connally in these frames.

Posner: "According to Dr.

Charles Gregory, one of the sur- geons who attended Connally at

Parkland, when the bullet passed

through the Governor, it com-

pressed his chest wall, and the

epiglottis involuntarily opened,

forcing air out of his mouth." Dr.

Gregory was the orthopedic sur-

geon who operated on Connally's

wrist. Chest wounds or their effects '

were not his area of expertise. Posner: "Dr. Gregory estimated

that such an expulsion of air could Come up to half a second after the bullet struck" Dr. Gregory esti-

mated "on the order of 1/4 to 1/2 second" (Thompson, 1967). Pos-ner's statement is consistent with this, but he phrases it to emphasize the 1/2 second he needs for his scenario. Posner. "Dr. Gregory had

not seen the Zapruder film when he testified, instead basing his

opinion on his medical expertise" The reference for Dr. Gregory is to page 89 of Josiah Thompson's Six Seconds in Dallas. (The page number is wrong. The correct page is 71.) Thompson is not refer-ring to testimony by Dr. Gregory before the Warren Commission or

anywhere else, but to Thompson's November 1966 interview with

Gregory in a Dallas hotel room_ We have spoken to Thompson

( 1998) about the interview He points out that it was not a even for-mal interview much less testimony. No recording was made. No

oaths were taken. Thompson and some Life magazine staffers met with Dr. Gregory in one of their hotel rooms. They showed him stills from the Zapruder film. It is not true that he had not previ-

ously seen the Zapruder film. In his Warren Commission testimony

he refers to the film and indicated that in frames Z23-9-7-236 Con-

nally was in position to have incurred the wounds he suffered.

Posner continues: "His [Gregory's) estimate, when applied to

the Zapruder film, would indicate that Connally was shot near

frame 226." Hy a verbal slight of hand typical of Posner's approach

to inconvenient facts, Gregory's informal upper limit has been

transmuted into an estimate. 2226 is actually outside Gregory's

range. We can hardly claim that Josiah Thompson's memory of

Gregory's informal opinion excludes frame Z226, but it does not

"indicate that Connally was shot near frame 226" either. When he

testified before the Warren Commission, Dr. Gregory said "I am not persuaded that this [SET] is very probable" (Warren, 1969, Vol.

IV, 127). The heart of the SBT is the

bullet's trajectory. Failure Analysis

constructed a trajectory "utilizing

the information on the wounds"

and their determination of the

position of the two victims and the

car at frame Z225. The positions of IFK's wounds are not as unam-

biguously established as Posner

intimates.

For the back wound they relied on the results of the autopsy

which Dr. Baden (1989, 5) has

described as follows: "Where

bungled autopsies are concerned,

President Kennedy's is the .exem-

plar...From the beginning it was

surrounded with confusion and

secrecy and papered over with an

enormous concern for appear-

ances." The New York State Medical Examiner at the time of the

autopsy, Dr. Milton Helpern, commented as follows (Hoots, 1967,

55): "The tragic, tragic thing is that a relatively simple case was hor-ribly snarled up from the very beginning, and then the errors were

compounded at almost every other step along the way"

FIGURE 8 shows one of the two surviving photographs of JFK's

back taken during the autopsy. The autopsy surgeons identify the

uppermost blemish as a bullet wound. They measured it to be 14

an below the mastoid process, an odd and unreliable reference point. They probed it with a finger and with a wire. They failed to

dissect the path of the bullet as they should have (Wilber, 1978). Probing the wound does not definitively establish the bullet's track

FIGURE 9 shows that the holes in JFK's clothing are not consis-tent with the autopsy position for the back entry wound. The hole

in JFK's suit coat was 5 3/a inches below the top of the collar and I

3/4 inches to right of the midline. The hole in his shirt was 5 3/4

inches below the collar and i 7/9 inches to the right. Posner treats

this problem in a footnote on page 305:

Vo!.6, No.4, 1998 59

FIGURE 9: Pictures of the back of JFK's shirt and jacket showing where the bullet entered

There is also some question as to why the location of the entry wound

at the rear base of the President's neck is several inches higher than is

indicated by the bullet holes in his suit jacket and shirt. Photographs

taken during the motorcade show the President's iacket was often

bunched up and riding up his hack as a result of his waving to the crowd

His back brace also pushed his clothing up. Therefore, measuring place-

ment of the holes in the clothing is not an accurate means of determin-

ing precisely where the bullet entered the body.

One might call this the cheap suit theory (CST).

The jacket and shirt would have had to ride up -4 inches to

match the upper blemish, Since the holes in the shirt and jacket are

nearly on top of one another, they would have had to ride straight

up almost identical distances. At frame Z225 the President was not

waving to the crowd, but was holding his arms in front of his chest.

His suit does not look

bunched up. The picture

taken earlier in the

motorcade and offered by

Lattimer (1980, 205), as

evidence of the suit "rid-

ing up" does not show it

bunched up anything like

4 inches. The back brace

was a simple corset worn

under his clothing around

his waist (Warren, 1964,

Vol 2, 125). It would not

have pushed his clothing

up. A close look at the Willis photo discussed above shows the

shirt was not riding up -1.2 sec earlier (Thompson, 1967, 223).

Posner is correct that the clothing holes are "not an accurate

means of determining precisely where the bullet entered..." but it

does not require much accuracy or precision to see that the cloth-

ing holes are inconsistent with an entry point -4 inches higher. The

size of entry wounds is too variable and the back photos are too

cluttered to establish that there is no other candidate for an entrance

wound. The situation in contrast to Posner's presentation of it is

confused.

While accepting the autopsy position for the back wound, the

FAA prosecution team and Posner reject the autopsy finding that

the bullet entered JFK's skull "above and to the right of the external

occipital protuberance (EOP)" (Wan-en, 1964, Autopsy Report,

543). All three pathologists marked the location of the entry wound

on a skull within 1 ❑n of the EOP (HSCA, Vol. 7, 1976, 115).A bul-

let from the 6th floor of the depository that entered near the EOP

would have exited through the face. JFK's face was not damaged.

The HSCA moved the entrance wound -4 inches higher out of the

occipital bone and into the parietal. This choice of location gives a

trajectory consistent with a shot from the 6th floor.

Posner claimed in 1993 testimony before the Legislation and

National Security Subcommittee of the House Committee on Gov-

ernment Operations that two of the pathologists—Drs. Humes and

Boswell—admitted to him that they had changed their minds

about the low entry point of the skull wound (LNSS, 1994). In

recorded interviews with Dr. Gary Aguilar, both Humes and

Boswell denied changing their minds on the wound location. More-

over, Dr. Boswell said he had never spoken with Posner (Aguilar,

1996, 1994). In 1995 testimony before the Assassination Records

Review Board (ARRB), Humes and Boswell insisted that JFK's

wound was low and in occipital hone. The ARRB asked Posner

twice for the tapes of his Humes and Boswell interviews, but as of

October 1998 when the ARRB dosed down they had not received

them (ARRB, 1998, Chapter 7).

Posner and the FAA prosecution team chose "the information

on the wounds" that

gave the answers they

wanted. They begged the

question.

Dr. Baden estimated

that the throat wound is

anatomically -10° higher

than the back wound

(HSCA, Vol 1, 231, exhibit

F-47). The FAA analysis

Posner cites (which

"achieved precision on the

placement I of JFK and

Connally] because it used a

sonic digitizer") claims the President's posture at 2.225 was consistent

with a shot from the 6th floor. A 6th floor shot would have had to

slope downward at an angle of -18°, so JFK would have to have been

bent forward by -28° to account for the upward trajectory. Elm

Street slopes downward by -3°, so JFK needed to he leaning forward

at an angle of -25° relative to the limousine. Neither a "sonic digi-

tizer" nor a "Zapruder enhancement" is needed to see that JFK was

not leaning forward -25° in 2.225.

After passing through JFK, the bullet is supposed to have hit

Connally's right shoulder. Posner describes the resulting wound as

follows: "[The] entry wound in Ithe] right shoulder was I VA inch

long—the exact length of the bullet—indicating the bullet was

tumbling." The wound was not 1 inch but 1.5 cm (Shackelford,

1994; Warren, 1964, Vol. 4, 104). The wound was consistent with

either a tumbling bullet or a tangential entry. Both Drs. Shaw and

Gregory were of the opinion that the bullet that entered Connally's

back had not previously struck anybody else. Under questioning by

Warren Commission counsel Arlen Specter, they admitted the pos-

sibility of a bullet that had only passed through soft tissue causing

the injury.

The bullet then knocked out four inches of Connally's 5th right

rib, exited below his right nipple and entered his wrist through the

SO SKEPTIC

dorsal side. Dr. Gregory, who operated on the wrist, observed that considerable material from the Governor's jacket sleeve was carried into the wound indicating,"It [the bullet] is in some way angular, it has edges or sharp edges or something of this sort It is not rounded or pointed in the fashion of an ordinary missile." He conceded to Specter that a missile traveling backwards could possibly account for the material carried into the wound. The bullet having passed through the wrist, shattering bone, severing nerve and tendon, came to rest in Connally's thigh. All this is supposed to have been accom-plished by CE399—the minimally damaged bullet found on a stretcher at Parkland hospital. Again Dr. Baden is trotted out "This is a damaged bullet and is not pristine. It is deformed; it would be very difficult to take a hammer and flatten it to the degree this is flat-tened This is a partially deformed bullet with a heavy jacket"

It is not difficult to flatten a bullet with a hammer. A few gingerly blows from a hammer in our garage flattened a Carcano bullet far more than CE399. The bullets are made of soft lead sur-rounded by a thin copper jacket They are designed to survive and not fragment when they hit head-on—not when tumbling.

The experiments with reduced velocity bullets that Posner cites to show that a bullet can shatter wrist or rib without being severely damaged involved non-tumbling, head-on collisions of the kind the jacket was designed to withstand. A blow to the side will subject the bullet to higher shear forces than a head-on hit A head-on bit pro-duces compression forces, which are easier to withstand.

According to the SBT the bullet had to hit the wrist going back-wards in order to explain the material carried into the wound. The Carcano bullet is not a full metal jacketed bullet The jacketing does not seal fully in the back The FAA experiments shooting Carcano bullets at reduced velocities head-on through a cadaver's wrist do not test the relevant hypothesis, Dr. Latimer is quoted saying "it the bullet] never hit a hard surface, like bone, on its nose," but it is

supposed to have shattered a rib at near full velocity in a weaker sideways orientation and punched through a living wrist bone with its unsealed rear jacketing.

Another pillar of the SBT is the neutron activation analysis (NAA) undertaken by Dr. Vincent Guinn for the HSCA (HSCA, Vol. 1, 490). Posner summarizes Guinn's results as follows: "Guinn's finding ended the speculation that CE 399 had been planted on the stretcher, since there was now indisputable evi-dence that it had traveled through Connally's body, leaving behind fragments." To support this statement he quotes from Dr. Guinn's HSCA testimony as follows:

"The stretcher bullet 10E3991 matches Ihe fragments in the wrist,"

Guinn said, "and that indicates indeed that that particular bullet did

fracture the wrist." When asked if there was a chance that another (Ar-

ian° bullet could have the same composition as Connally's fragments,

he said, "Extremely unlikely, or very improbable, however you prefer"

The first quotation does not accurately reflect Dr. Guinn's testi-

mony. The full quotation reads: —the results merely say that the

stretcher bullet matches the fragments in the wrist, and that indi-cates indeed that that particular bullet did fracture the wrist It unfortunately can't tell you anything else because there were no other bits and pieces along the other wounds." Dr. Guinn only claims a match between CE399 and the wrist. He does not establish that CE399 caused all of ConnalVs wounds, much less JFK's back and throat wounds. However, even what Dr. Guinn did say goes beyond what his data will support

NAA is a method for determining the proportion of trace ele-ments in a sample. The amount of antimony in lead is the most rel-evant to us here. The procedure is to expose a sample to a flux of neutrons from a nudear reactor and to count the characteristic decays of the radioactive isotopes induced. The result is a measure of the fraction of various trace elements in the sample. For the West-ern Cartridge Company (WCC) ammunition used in the assassina-tion, the antimony fraction ranges from near 0 to about 1200 parts per million (PPM). Dr. Guinn measured the fraction of antimony and other trace elements in 14 WCC bullets from four different manufacturing lots (6000, 6001, 6002, and 6003). He also repeated the measurements four times each on four of the bullets and mea-sured the bullets and testable fragments submitted to him including CE399 and one of the fragments from Connally's wrist.

Guinn found more variation from bullet to bullet than in multiple samples from a single bullet. This fact is the basis of his claim that it is "extremely unlikely, or very improbable" that CE 399 and the Connally fragments came from different bullets. However, while the intra-bullet variation is smaller than the inter-bullet variation, it is by no means small. TABLE 1 shows Guinn's antimony content results for the four bullets on which he made repeated measurements.

TABLE 1: Infra-bullet antimony content (PPM)

Bullet/Sample 6001C 6002A 6003A 6001B 1 1139 358 667 621 2 1062 983 395 646 3 1235 869 363 646 4 1156 882 441 791 Mean 1148 732 466 667 RMS 71 281 137 78

CE399 measured 833 PPM of antimony. The measured wrist fragment had 797 PPM—a "match." However, TABLE I shows that it is impossible to falsify the contention that fragments match. Even if the Connally fragment had come out 358PPM, it would have been consistent with a single bullet as variable as 6002A. The probability of a bullet failing to "match" itself is —40%. Nor is it "extremely improbable" that the wrist fragment match a bullet other than CE399. In TABLE 1 two bullets-6002A and 6001B—yielded values consistent with the Connally frag-ment. Among the 10 other bullets Guinn measured two more

va6, No.4, 2998

61

L

1999 SKEPTICS SOCIETY CALTECH

CONFERENCE REINVENTING

EVOLUTION DE GREAT DEBATE AT THE HIGH TABLE

OF EVOLUNONARY THEORY

WHAT '1 A LINE UP!!!! Sign up soon-we meet

a sell out crowd!!

DR NILES ELDREDGE Curator, American Museum of Natural History, Co-discoverer of Punctuated

Equilibria, Author, The MinerS Canaty, Remventing Darwin. The Pattern of Evolution

DR. JACK HORNER. Curator of Paleontology, Museum of the Rockies. Author, Digging Dinosaurs.

The Complete T Rat. Digging Up Tyrannosaurus Rex, Dinosaur Mts.

DR. MICHAEL RUSE Professor of Phliosophy and Zoology. University of Guelph, Ontario. Author of

DatWIRISRI Defended. The Darwinian Paradigm. Monad to Man Myskevol Mysteries.

DR. EUGENIE SCOTT Executive Director. Nation& Center for Science Education. Recipient of the 1998

Isaac Asimov Science Award from the American Humanist Association

DR. MICHAEL SHERMER Publisher, Siena, Author, Why People Believe Weird Things.

Plus:

JAMES "THE AMAZING" RANDI and

RICHARD MILNER: "Charles Darwin—Live & in Concert" Darwin is brought to life by historian of science, songwriter, anthropologist, author, & entertainer Richard Milner, in a one of a kind musical theater experience.

Friday, May 2 1 — SOCIAL EVENING WITH MAGICIAN, Pasadena Hilton

Saturday, May 22— DAY: LECTURES by speakers listed above

PANEL DISCUSSION moderated by Frank Miele. EVENING. DUMBTH AWARDS with RANDY CASSINGHAM. KEYNOTE ENTERTAINMENT: RICHARD MILNER CONCERT.

Barter Lecture Hall, Caftech. Pasadena, CA

Skeptics Society Members and Guests: $85.00 each. Nonmembers arid Guests $110.00 each. The price includes all lectures, entertainment, and cotiee. There will be a no-host bar at the Friday night event. A generous lunch & dinner will be catered on-site for only $6.00 each

Charge it! FAX your credit card order to 626/794-1301 or place a credit card phone order at 626/794-3119. To order by mail send a check made out to Skeptics Society, or your credit card number to: Skeptics Society, P.O. Boo 338, Altadena, CA 91001. You can also e-mail your credit card number and order to: skepticmag@aol.com

YOU CAN NOW ALSO REGISTER ON THE SHOP CART PROGRAM ON THE WEB PAGE: www.skeptic.com To reserve a room at the Pasadena Hilton, the host hotel, call 626/577- 1000, and ask for the Cattech/Skeptics' rate of $124.00 a night.

(6002B at 732 PPM and 6003A at 730 PPM) are reasonable

matches. As Guinn himself testified: "It is much easier to exclude; if you

find two samples that differ markedly, it is easy to say definitively

they did not have a common origin." Guinn's data are consistent

with only WCC ammunition being used. All the fragments he

tested had the low antimony content characteristic of Western

Cartridge Carcano bullets. Most bullets have antimony contents at

the level of 1% or more and would have been easy to detect if they

were among Guinn's samples. However, Guinn's attempt to defin-

itively link CR99 and the "fragments" from Connally goes

beyond what the data will support.

The Posner/FAA version of the SBT is unconvincing. Pre-

sented with fancy graphics and hi-tech computer modeling, the

analysis suffers from the garbage-in-garbage-out phenomenon.

Guinn's results were overstated. NAA is merely consistent with

CE399 being the bullet that hit Connally's wrist. That a tumbling

bullet could have caused all the damage attributed to it and

emerged as unscathed as CE399 is not plausible.

CASE STILL OPEN

The three examples above illustrate how the evidence as pre-

sented in Case Closed is distorted and misrepresented to support

the lone assassin theory. Posner leads his readers to believe that

advances in science and technology have allowed him to dose

the case, but science and technology serve only a rhetorical func-

tion in Case Closed. Computer models and fancy graphics are

opinion not evidence; they only output what has been input.

When Posner uses words like "enhanced" or "exact," he is misdi-

recting your attention, so that you will not look for yourselves

and see that the evidence he is referring to does not support the

claim he is making.

These are not just isolated errors. Case Closed is biased in its

presentation of all the evidence. It is a brief for the prosecution,

not a serious work of historical research. It is an apologetic—con-

vincing to those who already believe. It fails as historical science.

Although Case Closed has been thoroughly discredited by serious

acz4ssination researchers, many skeptics have swallowed it without

a twinge of criticism and the mainstream media turn to Posner as

the authority on the assassination whenever the subject arises.

With the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) coming to

its statutory end, Posner appeared on the Today Show to comment

(NBC., September 30, 1998) and Newsweek chose him to write a

column on the legacy of the ARRB (Posner, 1998, 49). Ironically

the media called on Posner to comment on the final report of the

ARRB, which by releasing long-dosed files, had conclusively

demonstrated that die case was not dosed. That the media which,

as John Stossell pointed out on The Power of Belief (ABC, October

6, 1998), routinely features channelers, psychic detectives and

62 SKEPTIC

"alternative" healing, should rely on Posner is not that surprising,

but one might hope for a higher standard of critical thinking from

skeptics.

What can we conclude about the WIC assassination? There is no "smoking gun" that proves conspiracy. On the other hand to accept the lone assassin theory requires us to swallow myriad inconsisten-cies, implausible explanations of key evidence and numerous odd

coincidences. One does not have to scour the evidence like a defense attorney hunting for something to confuse a jury to find these prob-lems. They crop up everywhere, not just in the examples we have discussed, but in every aspect of the case.

Thirty-five years after the a.s.sacsination the case is still open. Skeptics should keep an open mind. Skeptics should be more skepticaL 0

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aguilar, Gary. 1996. "Enduring Controversies in the Medical Evidence." IFK/Deep Politics Quarterly. Vol. 1, No. 3.

1994. "New Information on the Autopsy Findings, The Autopsy Pho-tographic Record and Statements of Gerald Posner on rFK's Patholo- gists?* Paper presented at 1999 COPA convention; the recordings of Dr. Aguilar's conversations Drs. Humes and Boswell were submitted to the Assassination Record Review Board.

Alvarez, Luis. 1976. "A Physicist Examines the Kennedy Assassination Film." American Journal of Physics. Vol. 44, No. 9.

ARRB. 1998. Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board.W whits= D C: U5 GFO; ape htp: /A,.w.sfasotosgpradvizorsvardS61/inatthttn1 on the web.

Baden, Michael. 1990. Unnatural Death: Confessions of a Medical Examiner. New York: Ivy Books.

Blum, William. 1986. The CIA: A Forgotten History. Highlands, Ni: Ved Books. Brackman, Harold. 1996, "Farrakanspiracy." Skeptic Vol. 4, No. 3

. 1992. Farrakhan's Reign of Historical Error. Los Angeles: Simon Wiesenthal Center.

Church. 1976. Report of the Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with respect to Intelligence Activities. Chairman Sen. Frank Church. w asfironn DC: US GPO.

Conover, Matthew. 1997. "Castro Must Go, Go, Go!' Mother Jones. July 29; see the CIA memo describing the operation at http://bsd.mojones.com thellraiser_central/sideshowicastro.html.

Cranor, Milicent. 1994. "The Wandering Wounds." The Fourth Decade. March, Vol.l, No. 3. . 1997."The Magic Fragments and Other Stories." Kennedy Assassination

Chronicles. Vol. 3, No. 2. . 1998. Private communication.

13eSalles and Hobbs. 1994. "Alvarez and Lattimer Revisited." Videotape, pri-vate communication.

Dworetskv, M.M. 1998. "Wind and Gunsmoke." Dealey Plaza Echo (U.K.). Vol. 2, No. 2.

Edgewood. 1964. Video tape obtained at National Archives II; There is also a written report which have not succeeded in obtaining yet also see Larry St urdivan's HSCA testimony (Vol. 1. 3831.

Emery, Fred. 1994. Watergate: The Corruption of American Politics and the Fall of Richard Nixon. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Folliard, lames R. 1993: "Gerald Posner Closes the Case." The Fourth Decade. November, Vol. 1, No. 1.

Gerlich, Nick. 1997. "November in Dallas." Skeptic Vol. 5, No. 4. Gaddy, David et al. 1998. The Confederate Secret Service and the Assassina-

tion of Lincoln. Diane. Groden, Robert. 1994. The Killing of a President. New York: Viking Studio

Books. (Contains a large number of Zapruder frames.) Hansen, Mark. 1996. "Out of the Blue American Bar Association Journal.

February. Henry, Porter. 1995. "Conspiracy Theories: Searching for Sense Amid the

Senseless." Skeptical Inquirer. Vol. 19, No. 3. (This article reports on talks by Melanie Klein and Don Kates at the 1994 CSICOP conference.)

Hersh, Seymour. 1983. The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon Whirr House. New York: Summit Books.

Hoch. Paul. 1998. Private communication. Hosty, James. 1996. Assignment: Oswald. Arcade Publishing, New York. Houts, Marshall, 1967: Where Death Delights: Adventures in Courtroom

Medicine. New York: Coward-McCann, Inc. HSCA. 1979, Hearings Before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the

US House of Representatives 95th Congress, 2nd session, Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO; available on CD-ROM from L.M.P. systems.

Hurt, Henry. 1985. Reasonable Doubt. New York: Henry Holt & Co.

Itek. 1975. John Kennedy Assassination Film Analysis. Francis Corbett, Itek Corporation (unpublished).

lurddtarineo, Barb. 1994. "Posner and Witness Testimony: A Few Examples." Electronic Assassination Newsletter. Issue frl, http://home.cynetnev'jfk

Lattimer, John. 1989. Kennedy and Lincoln. New York: Harcourt Brace lovanovich.

LNSS. 1993. Legislation and National Security Subcommittee of the Commit-tee on Governments Operations. U.S. House of Representatives, 103rd Congress, November 17, W ashiwten DC: US GPO.

Lier, Mark. 1996."Can We Know What Really Happened in the Past?" Skep. tic. Vol. 4, No. 4.

Lifton, David. 1989. Best Evidence. New York: McMillian. McCarthy, Roger. 1992. Testimony ar American Bar Association Mock Trial of

Oswald. San Francisco: American Bar Association. . 1993. "Affidavit Sworn to Before Karen Kates, Notary Public," Decem-

ber 6, 1993; available on the web at http://home.cynetmet /jfkimcchtm. North, Mark. 1991. Act of Treason. New York: Carroll & Graf. Occarn. 1300. William of Occam, 1284-1397; "Entia non sum multiplicanda

prover necessitatem"; sex Oxford English Dictionary. Posner, Gerald. 1993. Case Closed. New York: Random House.

1998."Cracks in the Wall of Silence." Newsweek October 12, Vol. 132, Na 15. Rose, Jerry D. 1993. "The Deadly Smirk and Other Inventions." The Fourth

Decade. Vol. 1, No. I. Scott, Peter Dale. 1995. "A Review of Gerald Posner. Case Closed: Lee Har-

vey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK." Deep Politics II: Essays on Oswald. Skokie, Illinois: Green Archives Publications.

Shackelford, Martin. 1993. "Case Close& Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assas-sination of JFK by Gerald Posner: a Preliminary Critique." The Investiga-tor. August-September, No. 5. . 1998. Private communication.

Shermer, Michael. 1996. "Can History be a Science?" Skeptic VoL 4, No. 4. . 1997. "The Belief Module" Skeptic Vol. 5, No. 4.

Sherrington, C. S. 1898: "Experiments in Examination of the Peripheral Distribution of the Fibers of the Posterior Roots of some Spinal Nerves." Philos. Trans. 1905, 45-186 (introduces the term 'decerebrate rigidity').

Sifakis, Carl. 1991. Encyclopedia of Assassiriarions. New York: Facts on File. Smith, Elbert. 1998. "Shoot-out on Pennsylvania Avenue" Art, ter. Riumry.

Vol 33, No. 2; http://www.thehistorynetcom/AmericanHistorylarti-des/ 1998/06982_texthtm

Snyder, Arthur and Margaret 1997. "Critique of the let Effect." Talks at JFK Lancer 1996,1997 and 1998 conferences, Dallas, Texas; available on video from JFK Lancer Books. Also, talk at 1997 COPA conference in Dallas, Texas.

Snyder, Louis. 1973. The Dreyfus Case. New Brunswick, NI: Rutgers Uni-versity Press.

Starks, David. 1994. "The Posner Report: A Study In Propaganda: One Hundred Errors in Gerald Posner's Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK." Electronic Assassinations Newsletter. Issue *1, http://home.cynetnetijfk

Thompson. Josiah 1967. Six Seconds in Dallas. New York: Bernhard Gleis. . 1998. Private communication.

Thorburn, William, M.D. 1887. "Cases of Injury to the Cervical Region of the Spinal Cord." Brain. Vol. 9.

U.S. News. 1993. U.S. News and World Reports. Vol. 115, No. 9. Vankin,Jonathan.1995,50 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time New York: Citadel Press. Warren. 1969. Hearings Before the President's Commission on the Assassination of

President John F. Kennedy Washington. D,C: U.S. GPO.; also Report of the Pres- ident's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Washing- ton, D.C.: U.S. GPO; available on CD-ROM from LM.P. systems. 1997.

Weisberg, Harold. 1994. Case Open: The Omissions, Distortions and Falsifi- cations of Case Closed. New York: Caron & Graf.

vo1.6, No.4. 1998 63